Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Fedora Core and Fedora Extras To Merge

Posted by kdawson on Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:38 PM
from the one-hat-to-bind-them dept.
Businesses Red Hat Software Software Linux
Kelson writes to tell us about a Fedora Weekly News article reporting that, beginning with Fedora 7, the distinction between Core and Extras will cease to exist. This development comes out of the Fedora summit held in November. From the article: "Starting with Fedora 7, there is no more Core, and no more Extras; there is only Fedora. One single repository, built in the community on open source tools, assembled into whatever spins the Fedora community desires." Kelson adds: "The post goes on to list three 'spins' they plan to introduce at Fedora 7's April release: server, desktop and KDE. Presumably these would be 1-disc installation sets, with further packages downloaded over the network, rather than the 5-CD collection needed to install Fedora 6."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Fedora Holds Summit To Map Its Future 92 comments
lisah writes "Last month members of the Fedora community met for a three-day summit (wiki here) designed to chart a course for future version releases as well as to plan other Fedora projects. Team members say they want to leverage the enthusiasm of a community that has demonstrated a willingness to develop Fedora Extras (add-on features to the Core package) and support Fedora Legacy (past releases). Red Hat's community development manager, Greg DeKoenigsberg, said, 'Community contributors have proven conclusively over the past 18 months that they can build packages every bit as well as Red Hat engineers — better, in some cases.' In addition to creating several proposals that will be introduced the the community for input and feedback, the summit also gave rise to the newly-created position of Fedora Infrastructure Leader." Linux.com and Slashdot are both owned by OSTG.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Fedora Core and Fedora Extras To Merge 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • As long as I can still upgrade with yum.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by DigitalReverend (901909) on Monday January 08 2007, @10:43PM (#17518524)
    I won't have a problem with this. In fact, I think it's about time as a lot of things that were called Extras were actually needed items so this will be a good thing. The once CD idea rocks too.
    • TFA just said "1 disc" not "1 CD." If FC6 is anything to compare by, it'll need to come on one dual-layer-DVD or perhaps one BluRAY disc.

    • I would prefer... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jd (1658) <imipak@yahCOFFEEoo.com minus caffeine> on Monday January 08 2007, @11:40PM (#17518910) Homepage Journal
      ...something along the lines of SLS or Slackware, where you have logical collections grouped together spread over as many disks as necessary. That way, you wouldn't need three different install spins - you could have just one - and all packages would be extensions. This has many advantages (fewer CDs for special-purpose uses, each collection can be updated independently, you can handle more permutations of install options, and so on) at the not unreasonable cost of having more CDs if you want absolutely everything.

      However, I feel that there are enough packages where the number of permutations of compile-time options is large and where the number of dependencies between package types is unpredictable that the "ideal" would be to have a web interface that let you roll your own set of ISOs online with just the stuff you want with the options that you want. (This is more restrictive than, say, gentoo, but it would be about the same to QA as the current Fedora with less overhead for the admin than Fedora and less install time than gentoo.)

      • Ooooh,

        There are a few places out there with scripts that will build a distro from FC.

        The main problem with the last one I used seemed to be proper lack of dependency checking. A secondary problem was not providing any link to what the package provided other then the rpm name itself.

        It was also dreadfully slow!

        All from the comfort of your web browser!

        So at least a bit of this is already started and could very well be improved upon.

        In any event, it's been a while since I've looked at it, but with a bit of rum
        • I've not been impressed with the dependency checking in Rawhide, so maybe that's no big loss. :) Seriously, I'll take a look for some of those scripts, or maybe roll up a few of my own. It shouldn't be hard to do well - either at source level or binary level - and although building an ISO image is nowhere near as fast as it should be, I think it should be easy enough to do better than alright.

      • While that's a really interesting idea, it's really hard to make that work right with bittorrent. :-(

    • So, what's the deal with KDE and gnome needing different disks then? It seems bizzare to me that a group of hackers so tightly integrated the desktop into a set of apps that they cannot play nicely with other desktops. If it was M$ integrating a web browser into an OS well, that I get, but Linux is practically splitting into two OS's over the choice of window dressing and themes these days. What the heck is that?!? It's like M$ distributing two versions of XP, one with the classic desktop, and one with
      • It's not a compatibility thing, it's a look&feel thing. You can use Konqueror with a Gnome desktop or Nautilus with KDE, but why would you want to?
    • I won't have a problem with this. In fact, I think it's about time as a lot of things that were called Extras were actually needed items so this will be a good thing. The once CD idea rocks too.

      Actually, I think this totally sucks. Fedora was the bloated distro, but what was nice about that, is if you were trying to setup a "good for everything" distro, it was the one you reached for, as it was likely to have most everything out of the box that you wanted.

      What I hate is sitting down to do a
      • Nah, iso's are inevitably outdated before you even get them. I just did a fresh install of Fedora Core 6 this past weekend. Guess what, the kernel was buggy (cifs filesystem fails on directories with > 100 entries). Better to do a network install so instead of downloading 5 gig DVD, you only download the packages when you need, and get the latest versions. Bandwidth being what it is these days, packages download so fast it's not even worth caching rpm's on your hard drive. At 6Mb/s, firefox downloa

  • Who said anything about one CD? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by pembo13 (770295) on Monday January 08 2007, @10:44PM (#17518540) Homepage
    I've been following the development, and while the server install MAY be one cd, I haven't seen anything to suggest that such an artificial restriction would be set. If anything it may be a specific minimal spin.

    • Re:Who said anything about one CD? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by radarsat1 (786772) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:04PM (#17518676) Homepage
      I've been following the development, and while the server install MAY be one cd, I haven't seen anything to suggest that such an artificial restriction would be set. If anything it may be a specific minimal spin.


      Why is it that distros are still so predominantly media-based anyways?
      Every single time I've installed Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, or Gentoo in the past.. oh.. 4 years or so, I've done it using a network-based method.
      It seems to me like it's much more efficient to just download the packages you need instead of downloading GB's worth of apps only to actually install and use a portion of them.

      When I _have_ installed from CD, I tend to go and do an update to the latest packages immediately, and end up re-downloading new copies of most of the packages anyways, making it even more of a waste of bandwidth.

      Why do distros still concentrate so much on CD and DVD releases, instead of just promoting the network-based install methods?

      And when will we see a distro that incorporates bittorrent into its packaging download system? ;-)
      (Slightly joking on that last one.. I've no idea if it would be appropriate, not to mention trust-worthy. But it is an interesting idea for distros that can't afford nice servers and don't have tons of mirrors.)
      • Bittorrent would be hard to work with, unless you could find people willing to give up some of their internet connection most of the time to seed packages... Anyway, it's not hard for any open source program to find mirrors in the first place. Many universities provide them, as do places like Sourceforge.

      • Re:Who said anything about one CD? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Burdell (228580) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:13PM (#17518744)
        I recently downloaded a DVD image of SuSE and mailed to a friend stationed in Iraq. Another friend is only able to get dialup at his home (he could probably get satellite, but they have download caps).

        High speed Internet is NOT widespread enough to require everything be done over the network. Even when it is, it is often more convenient to have media in-hand; I have more bandwidth at work (OC3+DS3s) than at home (DSL), so it sometimes still makes sense to burn things at work (or at least download to a notebook) and carry them home.

        Networks are still slow: 3Mbps DSL is about the same speed as a 2x CD-ROM drive.
      • I normally do a network install from the .iso myself. Apparently there are technical aspects against yum+bittorrent
      • Well, Debian has always had a minimal network-based install. Just checking the Debian page...it appears to be up to 180 MB now. It used to be around 75 MB, but it's growing--mostly because the installer is becoming a lot more sophisticated than it used to be. Gentoo also has a minimal cd coming in at about 120 MB.

        Fedora, when it was Red Hat, used to have an installer you could boot off of a floppy and then do a network install, but I don't think they have that anymore. Ubuntu never really bothered with a mi
      • Indeed, as the network install option is still there and quite easy to find.

        Just last week I burned the boot image (8mb) for FC6 and installed everything else from redhat's servers over the network. It was quite painless from installation to start.

        The only drawbacks were the time involved in nabbing each package and some mirrors were dreadfully broken. (looked like updates were applied to the main tree or a version mismatch)
      • Hmmm,

        Perhaps CD/DVD distros are most prevalent because not everyone has the same set of circumstances as you.

        1) Some people value (eg. sys admins for large setups) the reliability of getting a repeatable install.

        Imagine reporting bugs in a distro that was continually changing where you couldn't quote a distro number. Yes this could be managed on a network but not so easily as stating a distro CD/DVD version.

        2) Some people will go so far as not installing a patch until it's verified.

        If you're not net connect
    • Ubuntu has become very popular, IMO in large part because of the sheer simplicity of a single CD that now can be used both as 'Live CD' and to install a fully-functioning OS. Once it's installed, you can go back into Synaptic and add more packages if you like, but the point is that you don't have to. This should not have escaped the notice of other distros, who would then be prompted to ask the obvious "Why can't we do that?".

      I haven't seen anything to suggest that such an artificial restriction would be

      • Ubuntu has become very popular, IMO in large part because of the sheer simplicity of a single CD that now can be used both as 'Live CD' and to install a fully-functioning OS. Once it's installed, you can go back into Synaptic and add more packages if you like, but the point is that you don't have to. This should not have escaped the notice of other distros, who would then be prompted to ask the obvious "Why can't we do that?".

        This is exactly why I installed Ubuntu on my work computer - I only had a couple

      • Well there is the single DVD install, and soon to be an official Live CD.
    • I will admit to the "one CD" limit being wishful thinking on my part, assuming that this would start being feasible now that everything will be "one single repository." Besides, if they're talking about a "desktop spin" and a "KDE spin," that implies leaving KDE off one set of media, which implies paring down the contents of the install media.

      Still, I should have used a phrase like "With any luck..." or "One hopes..." instead of "Presumably..."
  • ...Now if only they could also roll atrpms into Core/Extras.

    </wishful_thinking>

    (Yeah, I know why they can't)

  • How about a USEFUL spin? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by erroneus (253617) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:04PM (#17518678) Homepage
    I've been a Fedora user from the start and a Redhat user before that. I have resisted everyone's pleadings about Ubuntu and all the rest. But one thing I wish would change (though I know never will) would be having the more fun and useful things included like DVD and other media playback support. Just house that spin in some other country that doesn't care about the patents and stuff...you know?

    • Maybe the Livna [livna.org] people could host Livna Linux, which is just Fedora core with all their evil patent encumbered and/or non-Free packages in place of the fully Free but less capable ones. If they only provided the download via bittorrent it likely wouldn't even cost them a huge amount of bandwidth.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by essdodson (466448)
      There's a difference between what's right and what's easy. People need to be aware of the implications of software patents and this is one way of driving that message home.

  • i've seen this before (Score:4, Funny)

    by macadamia_harold (947445) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:06PM (#17518692) Homepage
    beginning with Fedora 7, the distinction between Core and Extras will cease to exist.

    I think the DOJ refers to that as "bundling".
  • maybe upgrades will work better...

  • What about an "embedded" spin? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Samrobb (12731) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:52PM (#17518968) Homepage Journal

    Seriously.

    I spent the last 5 years working for TimeSys [timesys.com], and we did a lot of work to adapt various Fedora Core packages for embedded systems use.

    One of the tools we developed along the way was something called tsrpm [timesys.com], a set of wrappers for RPM that makes cross-compiling RPMs a relatively painless process. It's open source (GPL), has support for a number of different processor architectures (x86, various flavors of ARM and PPC, etc.), and can be used to compile packages using a glibc or uclibc based tool chains. It's non-intrusive, and uses a hint file (standard bash shell script) to conditionally control various phases of the RPM and source code build process. It's even capable of building a cross-development tool chain from source RPMs, though that process can be a little hairy.

    When I left, IIRC, we had over 300 RPMs, mostly from FC5, that we could build for a good 9-10 distros (variations of architecture/libc combinations). That was the result of myself and the tsrpm author (Chris Faylor) spending about 2-3 months on the whole thing... and that included the time it took for Chris to get new gcc-4.x based tool chains building for most of the architectures.

    If anyone's curious, you can see the free-as-in-[beer,speech] releases of tsrpm and some whet-your-appetite FC5-based distros here [timesys.com].

  • First the Extras, then the Redhat Server distributions. Then CentOs. Then SuSE. Soon Debian, Ubuntu and friends. Then Fedora will consume Mac OS, and last, with a giant belch, Vista. This is all part of their evil plan to take over the universe, and I, for one, welcome our new Fedora overlords!

  • 5-CD collection? (Score:3, Informative)

    by FooAtWFU (699187) on Tuesday January 09 2007, @01:10AM (#17519440) Homepage
    Hey, I just installed Fedora Core 6 last Thursday, and I'm pretty sure there were 6 of those darned CDs I had to mess around with.

  • Role Of Community (Score:4, Interesting)

    by quantaman (517394) on Tuesday January 09 2007, @01:45AM (#17519646)
    This is interesting since Fedora Core packages are maintained only by Red Hat employees whereas extras contains both Red Hat and user maintained packages. I wonder if Red Hat will continue to mark a few important packages in the unified repo as Red Hat only, or if they might have more direct leadership over the unified repo than they currently do over extras.

  • Other Fedora 7 Plans (Score:3, Informative)

    by mandreiana (591979) on Tuesday January 09 2007, @02:22AM (#17519812) Homepage
    http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/7 [fedoraproject.org]

  • One disc installation sets (Score:3, Insightful)

    by vga_init (589198) on Tuesday January 09 2007, @02:32AM (#17519848) Journal
    You mean like Ubuntu? It looks like Fedora is taking some tips from the "other" distro.

    Personally, that was one of the things I liked about Fedora--I could download the incredibly large DVD that contained everything and the kitchen sink. Download packages over the network? Pff... I used to sit there and remove/insert CD after CD of the latest linux systems. I remember I had SuSE professional that came with 7 discs. When I finally got a DVD burner, it turns out I didn't need it anymore... distros magically fit on a single CD all of the sudden. >:o

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Kalriath (849904)
      The "From the one-hat-to-bind-them dept" probably wont help with that cause.

    • We won't, because this is actually a smart move.

      It's a smart move, of course, because it makes Fedora more like Debian.

      /me dodges incoming bullets

    • "if the usually jackasses didn't post the usual anti Fedora FUD."

      You mean like this [slashdot.org]?

    • The usually (sic) jackasses are the reason everyone comes to Slashdot as opposed to reading this on Digg.

      Us jackasses that have been hear for many years tend to know a thing or two and have learned a lot of things the hard way. And as to the "anti-Fedora FUD", I prefer to look at it as the openness to non-Redhat-based distributions. And... yes, you can thank Redhat for turning their former legions of loyal Redhat desktop fans on to Debian, Ubuntu, and Gentoo. Thank you Redhat for ensuring diversity in Linux
      • If your machine locks up regularly, then perhaps you should look to something other than blaming Fedora. I have machines from single- to quad-CPU machines that have run for so long on Fedora Core 2 that theit next upgrade was to CentOS 4.4. These are machines that get used 24x7, under heavy loads. Some of the DBMS machines have gone for months without ever seeing a system load below 1.

        It may be your configuration, your hardware, or various other causes, but if you're going to complain about Fedora, at le

        • Re:It would be nice (Score:4, Insightful)

          by syousef (465911) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:09PM (#17518710) Journal
          So if a distro doesn't support for example hardware properly, that's the now the end user's fault?

          If it's worked for you and not for someone else who thought they had the proper hardware after the appropriate amount of research that's good luck NOT good management. ...and you wonder why people won't jump ship to Linux.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by tepples (727027)

            So if a distro doesn't support for example hardware properly, that's the now the end user's fault?

            It's the end user's fault for either A. buying hardware without checking the distro's hardware compatibility list or B. switching operating systems within the lifetime of one computer.

            • Re:It would be nice (Score:5, Informative)

              by syousef (465911) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:57PM (#17519006) Journal
              Bloody hell /. is full of intolerance today!

              Re-read my comment - the part about doing the appropriate research.

              IF you do the research (compatibility list, newsgroups etc.) AND it still fails it's not your fault as an end user. PERIOD. You've done all you can.

              • IF you do the research (compatibility list, newsgroups etc.) AND it still fails it's not your fault as an end user. PERIOD. You've done all you can.

                I have to think that there's still something wrong with the process if the average user of a piece of software is expected to read compatibility lists. The sooner we start treating software seriously [slashdot.org] the sooner it will stop sucking. Honestly, if you buy a car, should you be expected to know its internals? To check "compatibility lists" for its parts?

                And yes, I know that certain zealots will just "well that's too much to expect from volunteers" but what I'm saying is maybe it should be expected anywa

          • Re:It would be nice (Score:5, Insightful)

            by NerveGas (168686) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:59PM (#17519020)
            I'd believe your comment if I hadn't thrown Fedora on every type of hardware from single-CPU/IDE machines to 4x/8x machines with high-end SCSI arrays and fiber networking, Intel and AMD architectures. Apart from sound and video, there's not a lot of hardware I haven't run it on. Other than one particular issue with a RAID card, it's done a good job of setting up hardware. It's not like it's hard for a distro to add a line to modprobe.conf telling it which driver to load....

            If anything, the problems you encounter are, in my experience, more likely to be problems with the Linux drivers themselves than with Fedora, although there may be a handful of cases to the contrary.

            steve
            • I'd believe your comment if I hadn't thrown Fedora on every type of hardware from single-CPU/IDE machines to 4x/8x machines with high-end SCSI arrays and fiber networking, Intel and AMD architectures.

              A year or so back, I tried upgrading a Red Hat 9 machine to the latest Fedora. The video chipset, perfectly functional under RH9, wasn't supported by Fedora. Similar issues with another box I was upgrading -- fully functional with RH9, virtual consoles broken under Fedora (bug reported and reproduced, but flagg
                • I had problems with Ubuntu working with my network and SCSI cards, and it was at that point that I started looking at Fedora, which works perfectly with all my hardware. YMMV.

                  Indeed it may, but my point was that FC4 actually introduced hardware support regressions against Red Hat 9. I feel uneasy with a distro where my currently supported hardware may become unsupported in the next release.

        • Re:It would be nice (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Schraegstrichpunkt (931443) on Monday January 08 2007, @11:12PM (#17518734) Homepage

          If your machine locks up regularly, then perhaps you should look to something other than blaming Fedora.

          Indeed. Clearly, it's the fault of the people who made gcc 2.96. *ahem*

          It may be your configuration, your hardware, or various other causes, but if you're going to complain about Fedora, at least complain about the *valid* deficiencies...

          If Fedora ships with a configuration that's unstable on particular hardware, and Debian doesn't---and you're not a developer---then choosing Debian is a smart and cost-effective solution. What do you expect?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.