Fedora Core 1 Released

EvilAlien writes "The Fedora Project has released Fedora Core 1, aka Yarrow. The release was expected on November 3rd, but was briefly delayed. The release notes has quite a bit of good detail, and is worth checking out for any preliminary questions you may have. Download options include BitTorrent in addition to the traditional collection of FTP mirrors."

Re:Why?

[acceleriter]

People make fun of Debian for being "politically pure" and slow to update . . . but it may be the last one left standing in the end.

Features

[AKAImBatman]

And the most amazing feature of Fedora? The fact that it's bigger than our Sun! I mean, what the *7#$ is on those 3 CDs?! Oh wait, let me guess. In true RedHat fashion, we have 3 FTP server, 7 email servers, 300 email readers, 20 instant messenger, 5 web browser, 3 versions of xBill, several hundred programs that sound like they do something interesting but don't, and 1 kitchen sink.

I mean really, what ever happened to "core system" vs. "extra software"?

What the...

[Geekenstein]

64 MB minimum for text mode, 192 minimum for graphical? When did we get so bloated? It looks like we're catching up to MS with an OS that has always had efficiency of resources as a primary strength. What gives?

One important issue...

[swagr]

I looked around the website and they don't really explain how important a priority stability is.
They do have a QA "project", but they also say they want to "Be on the leading edge of open source technology..."

I take it we're not talking OpenBSD/Debian-stable level of reliability. That's fine. But what's the goal? Will this stuff be /directly/ used by RedHat, or is there a "polishing" step?

Re:What the...

[bluelip]

64MB is _CLOSE_ to a recent Windows install?? HA!

You are still mostly free to uninstall whatever you'd like.

This isn't the only distro out there. If you need something small, try one of them that will even leave space after being put on a few floppies.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Features

[freeweed]

You know, no one's forcing you to install any of what you listed.

Unless the Fedora installer has changed from what RedHat (free) used to have, you can pick and choose as little or as much as you want. Install just the core stuff and you won't even be asked for the 2nd and 3rd CDs.

Personally, I like it. Much easier than hunting around for online all day.

Oh, and last time I checked, many other distros are even larger (iirc, Debian was up to 5 CDs a while ago), so I don't see where the RedHat bashing comes from.

I'm a switcher...

[lww]

to debian from RH8/9 servers. At the risk of inviting religous controversy, if I'm going to use a non-sponsored distro, I'd rather use one with more of a proven record as a successful community driven project.

Plus, let's face it, apt-get is apt-goodness.

Fedora vs. RedHat, and RHCE

[Doc Hopper]

My interpretation of their move is this:

1. They weren't making money on commercial RedHat releases. There are a few zealots like myself that run down to CompUSA (or whatever) to grab the latest release when it hits the shelves, but it was mostly to show our support for the company.

2. There is a lot of profit to be made in "support" in boxed product sales, and the enormous expense of Windows server licenses validate this proposition. They just need to be priced considerably below Windows support levels to compete.

3. Most desktop users want a bleeding-edge distribution so they can run the latest games and apps, and RedHat didn't want the tech support headaches and expense.

I think they just looked around at the playing field, saw that they could do little or nothing to prevent people from repackaging their product and selling it for a couple of bucks a CD, saw the numbers from their standard box sales versus the impressive revenue from comparatively few Enterprise Linux sales, and said "screw it, it's not worth our money to try to sell what everybody gets for free anyway".

Sad fact of life, that. Not enough freaks like me that like to buy the boxed set, I guess.

But I'm excited that Fedora is coming out with a release hot on the heels of the end-of-life announcements on RedHat boxed products. I think they'll find that the flexibility afforded them by a more open development model for their distribution, ala Mozilla.org, will help keep their server products competitive and "feed" the Advanced Server distribution with good ideas.

It remains to be seen how well it will take off, though... an awful lot of "mindshare" of hard-core Linux geeks is already invested in other distributions. As for me, I think they are doing it right, and although I'm certain they'll be off for 4-6 months of a rocky start, within a year they'll have a pretty solid volunteer contribution effort and a distribution that finally keeps up with cutting-edge features of other distributions. They've been behind the curve a long time (ugh "up2date" sucked vs. apt-get upgrade) on keeping their distro fresh; it is nice to see they've moved to a method that, perhaps, can keep it more current.

I wonder how they plan to handle RHCE's? I plan on taking the exam as soon as I finish reviewing for it, but I can't help but wonder if this move to Fedora on the desktop means that soon-to-be prospective RHCE's will no longer be able to just download the latest Redhat release and go, or if they'll need some special "student edition" of their Enterprise Linux product?

RedHat is NOT killing their desktop.

[GroundBounce]

Can't anyone on /. read? RedHat has simply said that they are not chasing the CONSUMER desktop for the time being. If you read the articles and if you go to RedHat's site, you will see that they are still quite interested in *corporate and business* desktops, where the application base is more controlled and limited, and there generally is not the need to support every consumer USB widget under the sun. Their "Enterprise Linux" offerings have versions tailored for both servers *and* (corporate) desktops.

Additionally, for individuals and small companies who want to do their own support, there is still Fedora, but it will have a shorter support lifetime.

Distros on DvD?

[phorm]

I think that DvD's are becoming popular enough that perhaps big distros will be available on the larger media format as well. If I had to choose from >2 CD's or a DVD for a slightly higher price, I'd go for DVD.

Oh, and "core system" vs "extra software" went out the window when the GUI came around in popularity and people started biatching "how come software X isn't here, bah!"

I'd say that if you were a previous RedHat user, Fedora's multiple CD's shouldn't bother you, and you can always stick with Debian (my pref) or whatever you otherwise use.

Re:Features

[freeweed]

Re-read my post.

you can pick and choose as little or as much as you want. Install just the core stuff and you won't even be asked for the 2nd and 3rd CDs.

Just download the first CD. Done. Assuming you don't want any extras that is :)

Having said that, if it takes you an entire day to download 3 CDs, talk to your provider. Takes me a couple of hours at most with my cable ISP. Or use the nice Netherlands mirrors, they're always fast :)

Re:One important issue...

[Anonymous Coward]

>I think Fedora is an answer to the whining of people who run Debian but say even unstable is too behind the times (gnome, xfree, etc).

Well considering Gnome 2.4.1 is already in Debian unstable is it that far behind the times? Gnome 2.4 was uploaded to unstable roughly 1 month after its release due to issues with migrating 2.2 to testing. Also XFree86 4.3 has been in experimental for a long time, it just isn't ready for unstable since it has problems still on some archs.

Re:Following Apple's OSS/CSS lead?

[Anonymous Coward]

>Does Red Hat's Fedora correspond to Darwin, with
>their Enterprise Linux corresponding to OSX?

No, because RH Enterprise Linux is still 100% open source. It'll also be the only Red Hat OS for which you (well, companies) can obtain official support and errata (for a price), and there are no downloadable ISO's.

You could make analogies (and I will: Fedora is a lot like Debian unstable, and RHEL is a lot like Debian stable crossed with the SuSe business model), but they'll be messy and incomplete (just like mine).

The dropping of old "Red Hat Linux" and its re-branding as Fedora is potentially a plus for the community, but clearly a loss for small business users and others who require a cheap, -supported- Linux. Fedora is free but not supported.

Re:um..

[Anonymous Coward]

The primary issue with slow Debian releases is due to the fact that it supports more than just i386. Many pieces of software just don't work without lots of patching on anything other than i386, take XFree86 for example.

I don't think Debian will ever be able to release more often than once a year, if it even manages to be that often.

Re:Totally ridiculous

[scons]

Well, not totally ridiculous, if you ignore the "Red Hat sucks" part of the rant and look at the substantive issue about what retail Linux users are losing.

What I'm going to miss is Red Hat QA, which to me was the real value-add of Red Hat and which is not part of what you get with your free Fedora download. (Check out the last two lines in the comparison chart [redhat.com] with the Enterprise Linux version.)

Due to Red Hat's QA, I always had a high degree of confidence that what I would get from up2date wouldn't break my RH system. Call me paranoid, but I don't have the same degree of confidence that the "developer community" will have the resources (time, machines and testing methodology) to maintain the same level of quality, especially given that the code base in Fedora will be apparently much larger than RHEL. I will be delighted if I'm wrong, but I'm expecting a gradual decline in quality.

Increasing the amount of support you get for $179 if you buy RHEL is okay so far as it goes, but that doesn't change the fact that the increase will price the QA-tested product out of many Linux users' home-computing budget (including mine).

I don't really blame Red Hat, because I think this move does make business sense for them. But I'm really disappointed that the retail Linux market never materialized to the point where they could keep shipping a high-quality, tested Linux desktop for ~$50-$70 and make money doing it.

Watch the fine print!

[rduke15]

Hidden in the release notes [redhat.com]:

- The input of non-ASCII characters from the system console is not possible; only graphical applications support the input of these characters.

If I understand this correctly it means a jump back of several years with the inability to write accented letters in the console.

In other words: useless crap in which you cannot even write 3 words in a row (except in English of course)

Can that be true?

Re: What the...

[jensend]

You can still run a text installation using RH packages with quite a bit less than 64 MB. Graphical environments for Linux have become much more resource-intensive than they used to be, but an X 4.3 install with a less-resource hungry DE than Gnome or KDE, such as XFCE, can still do fine with 64 MB. RedHat is here giving numbers which they will support and which ought to provide plenty of performance, not the "actually tolerable with" or much less the "bare minimum" numbers.

Re:um..

[bogie]

"Is there a more lofty goal here I'm missing?"

Yes. Having an OS that comes with modern Stable software that is easy for anyone to install and use. Fedora fills that role where as Debian doesn't for most people.

Re:I'm a switcher...

[Espectr0]

Seems to me that all that Debian has got to offer these days is apt-get. That's the first thing they say, and forget to say that almost every distro in the world now supports apt-get (even slackware)

Debian users say that debian is great because it's so stable. Well, if i wanted to use a stable server i would use freebsd (record in uptime in netcraft)

Debian users say that debian is great because the latest software is always available, i still say "no xfree 4.3" and tons of other packages that are missing, and they don't mention that mixing stable packages with unstable packages will break the system. You either use stable or unstable, and if you go with unstable you cannot go back unless you reinstall.

Debian users say that debian is great because of the social contract. Well, that social contract is the one that keeps some great packages from being packaged officially like mplayer and tons others.

So, what's the only thing that debian really does (good) that others can't? It runs on tons of architectures.

I dont know who is a bigger PITA, the debian zealot talking about apt-get and .debs or the gentoo zealot talking about their customized, bloat-free systems (they seem to forget that you need extra libraries to compile programs that you only need for compiling and not for regular use, filling up your drive really good with all the development libraries)