Fedora Core 4 Available 550
Limburgher writes "As of a few minutes ago, the torrents listed at duke went live. Nothing on the main site yet, however. The more people get on the torrents, the faster they will be. You all know the drill." Update: 06/13 19:07 GMT by T : Also in Red Hat-related news, halfbyte_hosting writes "CentOS 4.1 is now on the mirrors and ready for download."
Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Informative)
Here is that commentary about my process (I am a first-time user of Linux):
http://www.mygadgetbag.com/MGBCommentary/tabid/18
Also, for anyone wondering, here is a link to the newest updates that are in Fedora Core 4:
http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc4/#
I am very happy with Fedora Core 4 (beta) after using it for a few days. The only thing I am having trouble with is connecting to the Yum repositories, as described on the Fedora FAQ.
The main Fedora site is updated now, also!
I beat the Slashdot effect (Score:5, Informative)
Installed it onto my ThinkPad T23, 733MHz/1.13GHz with 512MB RAM. Familiar graphical installation procedure, auto-detected everything in my laptop. Didn't expect it not to, as previous Fedora Core releases did so. When setting up the soundcard though, couldn't hear the test sounds but booting into KDE produced the familiar jingle. SELinux option during installation is Enabled or Disabled, no halfway house as in FC3. Compiling with GCC4.0 has made a noticeable speed difference, especially in KDE 3.4. Start-up time seemed quicker as well.
As always, read the release notes. They have taken the decision to move some stuff off into the Fedora Extras project. XMMS was the main one I noticed. And yes, this being Red Hat-influenced, there is no support for MP3 or DVD playback straight off the installation discs.
If you have a Matrox-based card that requires you to use the Matrox-sourced mga_hal module, you're not going to have much luck configuring X until they release a new version for X.org 6.8.2. I get lovely vertical bars every 1cm on my TFTs using a G550 DVI.
Release Notes (Score:5, Informative)
The release notes are here [redhat.com]. Major changes include:
the mirrors are populated long time ago... (Score:4, Informative)
http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedo
http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedo
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/li
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linu
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linu
ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/4/ [tu-chemnitz.de]
ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/
ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/4/ [tu-chemnitz.de]
and many more....
dont wait for shitty slashdot to report on old news.
cuz nothin is older than the news of yesterday/yesterhour/yesterminute...
Main Site News (Score:1, Informative)
Thanks slashdot!
Re:Release Notes (Score:5, Informative)
Otherwise it can be a great way to understand what is coming down the pipe.
P.S. Parent poster forgot about GCC 4.0. That's a MAJOR feature itself, but also one of easiest to get burned by.
Re:Release Notes (Score:2, Informative)
Installed it already... ;) (Score:2, Informative)
Switching from init 1 to init 5 requested the root password which was novel. I'll have to track down what that's all about.
mirrors.kernel.org (Score:3, Informative)
http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/4/ [kernel.org]
ftp://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/4/ [kernel.org]
rsync://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/core/4/
Re:Upgrade path (Score:5, Informative)
There is not even a supported way to upgrade from FC3 to FC4, or even from a FC4 test release. The reason being explained to me was that testing all that upgrading would greatly slow down the release process. Personaly, I'd rather have to wait another month or two for a release then have to fresh install. It's not as big a deal as it is with windows though, since all the user settings are in
Re:Main Site News (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Informative)
Bits and pieces to test?
Nice troll, the distro has been solid and getting better each release.
I haven't used RedHat since 1997, but after the whole "enterprise" thing followed by the "fedora" program, I don't think I ever will.
Well, since you havent used it since 1997, you have no idea what you are talking about.
You're missing out, I HAVE been using it since 1997. With the exception of a few releases (redhat 6.0
Re:I beat the Slashdot effect (Score:3, Informative)
I believe that they've stopped offering the strict policy, so "on" would be the targeted policy that was offered in FC3.
Re:Linux Trademarked? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Upgrade path (Score:3, Informative)
My humble suggestion is *not* to upgrade though unless you have too. In a few months FC4 will be obsolete and FC5 will be out and so on and so forth. A recent kernel upgrade that I did (2.6.10-1-771_FC2) broke the ACPI interface on my laptop, so sometimes living on the bleeding edge can be tiresome, especially with your production PCs!
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Informative)
Be sure to read the forums. The game will run fine using DirectX emulation, but OpenGL mode is much faster. Using OpenGL mode I get faster framerates than I do on a XP pro system using the same settings and hardware. YMMV.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:4, Informative)
pre-emptive apt vs rpm rebuttal (Score:4, Informative)
If you make any comparisons which cross the above boundaries, you are either trolling or have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are discussing and should reald up before posting.
Try OpenSolaris. (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.opensolaris.org/faq/licensing_faq.html [opensolaris.org]
Anyone can create an OpenSolaris distro, in fact the guy who created cdrecord for linux (Joerg Schilling) is creating one called SchilliX.
http://schillix.berlios.de/ [berlios.de]
The great thing about OpenSolaris is that it is the opensourcing of Solaris 10 which means it has all the features and stability of that Operating system. It also has features that Fedora Core or linux don't have.
An example is DTrace. With DTrace, one can specify sensors in Solaris 10 and monitor everything. Even user programs.
You also have Zones in OpenSolaris which are like BSD jails, but are easier to maintain and create. Linux has user mode linux, but that is cumbersome compared to Zones.
SMF in OpenSolaris is questionable in benefit, but it allows services to be restarted automatically if they fail. Not something I'm interested in, but some people may like it.
But if you are unhappy with the bleeding edge of Fedora Core, give OpenSolaris a look when it comes out later this month.
Re:Linux Trademarked? (Score:4, Informative)
http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=registr
(Note: the mentioned William Della Croce is someone who fraudulently attempted to register Linux as a trademark; he got sued and transferred the trademark to Linus as part of settling the lawsuit.)
Typed Drawing
Word Mark LINUX
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software to facilitate computer use and operation. FIRST USE: 19940802. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19940802
Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number 74560867
Filing Date August 15, 1994
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Published for Opposition June 13, 1995
Change In Registration CHANGE IN REGISTRATION HAS OCCURRED
Registration Number 1916230
Registration Date September 5, 1995
Owner (REGISTRANT) Croce, William R. Della, Jr. INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 33 Snow Hill St. Boston MASSACHUSETTS 02113
(LAST LISTED OWNER) TORVALDS, LINUS INDIVIDUAL Assignee of FINLAND 5774 CANNES PLACE SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA 95138
Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Attorney of Record ROBERT T. DAUNT
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR).
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
FC4 rocks (Score:5, Informative)
In particular, OpenOffice 2 rocks. In FC it comes as individual packages for each app - ie, I get by with openoffice-core, openoffice-writer, and the English language package. In Ubuntu, I have to install and, worse, update a few massive packages.
Gnome does cool stuff. Like never stealing focus. An app wants focus, it pulses in the task bar. As it should be.
Extras now works well, it's easy to get a package into Fedora and there's a lot of useful stuff available. The days of having to go to freshrpms and dag wieers to find your app are numbered - FC4, FC Extras, and Livna for the patented stuff will satisfy most people. Other distros never had this problem, but other distros still don't have decent config tools, and other distros don't install menu items when they install GUI apps. Yes, this means you Debian.
There's a non-poo directory server that has proper ACL support (unlike OpenLDAP, where they were kept outside the directory), multimaster replication. etc as part of the distro. Combine it with JXplorer and you've got a decent Open Source LDAP server.
Off topic: once installed, OOo 2 is the first version I'd say would be on par with MS Office. The toolbars are decent - they no longer take up an entire row, and can be edited and docked together at will, like you damn well expect. Spell check can count selections. Floating docks becomes sidebars. And, surprisingly, it can work with MS Offices proprietary XML files. All the usual OOo features are still there
Other nice things about recent Fedoras:
FC3 and newer: Partitioning uses LVM by default. Online resizing is supported. Ext3 has signficant speed improvements, bechmarks favorably against Reiser, and unlike Reiser, works properly with SELinux.
FC3 but expanded in FC4: SELinux is enabled by default. For example, Apache is prevented from reading files who don't have the 'web content' context, and cgi scripts can't access particular device files without the right context either. If someone breaks into apachge, the chances of them going further than breasking into your web site are limited.
One note: while yum is getting better, I don't use it. Instead, I use Smart Package Manager. A command line and GUI tool from the author of apt-rpm and Synaptic, that replaes both those tools, and works with Yum metadata repositories. It's faster (downloads in parallel from each source), has a better GUI, and simpler error messages than yum and apt (no 'but version foo will be installed'-without-any-explanation type stuff).
Ask and though shalt receive! (Score:3, Informative)
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:3QYOKFWIML7MWVELF36AWWW3VTV
Re:Release Notes (Score:5, Informative)
Er, no.
Rawhide is where things first get tested.
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 1
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 2
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 3
After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 4
After that, Fedora Core 4
After that, Red hat Enterprise Linux.
Fedora works. It has a lot of texting. Report a bug, and someone will fix it. That someone probably works for Red Hat.
RHEL works too. And it's a lot more conservative - which yes, probably means it's a little more reliable, but doesn't mean FC is unreliable or a beta test. See bullet points above. Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing.
People don't buy RHEl cause FC is unstable. They buy RHEL so they can install a box this year and get 24/7 support, and training, and not have to upgrade, till 2011.
Re:Now that Debian's back in the game.... (Score:4, Informative)
Regards,
Steve
Extras (Score:5, Informative)
If you don't see your favorite package in Extras, you can always become a contributor [fedoraproject.org] yourself.
Re:Desktop Linux users, don't bother with Fedora (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Upgrade path (Score:3, Informative)
That said most configs is easily migrated unless you have been compiling your own brew and have messed around with loads of configs.
Re:Tracker busted. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Now that Debian's back in the game.... (Score:4, Informative)
Debian and Fedora are different distros w/different purposes. Fedora releases twice a year w/the latest and greatest, while Debian releases far less frequently w/a selection of old moldy stable tested proven software. Whereas Fedora brings the bleeding edge to just a handful of the most popular platforms w/o providing a convenient upgrade path, Debian makes itself available to both more platforms than any other distro and a systematic manageable way to upgrade to future releases. I may as well say this more clearly:
Fedora
Debian
If you're looking for a desktop distro, Fedora would be an excellent choice. If you're running a server on the other hand, Debian would be the obvious choice.
Re:Upgrade path (Score:3, Informative)
That said though, none of the system-wide settings are in there (but then none of the system-wide stuff is in
Re:Upgrade path (Score:3, Informative)
Re:mirrors.kernel.org (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Now that Debian's back in the game.... (Score:3, Informative)
Anyway I don't understand your Debian vs. Fedora view. What about Ubuntu, for example?
Fedora Core 4 Review (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Informative)
Tried installing Fedora Core 3 and got absolutely nothing, because apparantly the drivers for the very common MegaRAID Enterprise 1500 card were yanked.
I'm lucky that I wasn't one of the many people that did a kernel upgrade from RHN/RPM repositories to find out that the box would't boot after a reboot..
Point is, hardware issues affect any operating system. Fedora isn't a magical OS that just works on everything.
Re:Upgrade path (Score:5, Informative)
What's not supported is upgrades from tests (like FC4 test3) to stable releases (like FC4). That's it. Tests are not meant for use on production machines, or non-production machines by those who don't want to deal with the pain of actually, you know, testing stuff
Re:Pardon me, why use fedora? (Score:2, Informative)
The latest release for WBEL4 [whiteboxlinux.org] was in May 2005. It is the equivalent of RHEL4.
CentOS [centos.org] also looks like a good alternative.Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:4, Informative)
As the original poster said, you can't download up-to-date WinXP isos. FC4 will have support for newer hardware then a WinXP cdrom.
Note that there are still classes of hardware (laptops in particular) where linux falls short, mainly due to a lack of documentation. This is however improving.
Re:Upgrade path (Score:5, Informative)
That's not true at all. Upgrading from release to release is completely supported -- not in the "call Red Hat and they'll help you" sense, but in the "designed to work and if doesn't it will get fixed" sense.
Upgrading from test releases to final releases isn't supported (sometimes last-minute back-outs of dead end ideas makes that hard) but generally works.
And live update of a running FC3 system to FC4 via yum isn't officially supported, but also generally works just fine [fedoraproject.org].
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:4, Informative)
I also hate how windows update forces reboots after every download it considers major. Really slows things down, and doesn't continue automatically after the reboot with the other stuff you need to download.
Then there is all the stupid free crap that ought to be included, but isn't. Winzip, Acrobat, putty, winamp, AIM, Cygwin & Firefox (heh heh).
Then comes all the paid stuff. And all of that has to be updated. Total pain in the ass.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:1, Informative)
That problem was only an issue for people who dual boot. Those of us who don't dual boot never saw it.
Not to mention that, unlike Fedora which had a single release with a boot loading problem, every release of Windows has a "ridiculous boot sector problem:" They over-fucking-write the boot sector, without asking permission!
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Informative)
Likewise.
> nothing has ever come close to XP in regards to device drivers,
> NOTHING. And to compare that to ANY linux OS is ridiculous.
Whatever you say. In my laptop bag I am carrying a USB floppy that does NOT work in Windows XP at all (the only driver
the manufacturer ever released for it was for Win98 and doesn't work.) I have a PCMCIA DVD-ROM that required a hard-
to-find driver to work in Windows from expnet.com. I have a compact flash bluetooth radio from belkin that doesn't work in
any Windows OS and NEVER WILL (only available drivers for download are for WinCE/PocketPC and PalmOS.)
All of these devices _just work_ in Linux.
Re:Best slashdot ever (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about multimedia? (Score:2, Informative)
Bu... Bu... But what?
Then you know why you can't play eg. MP3s out of the box.
You also know that it's a piece of cake to get support for MP3, video players and whatever from places like eg. FreshRPMs [freshrpms.net].
Since I download the distro itself and don't buy it on a CD/DVD, it's no problem for me personally to also download the 3rd party apps and media support I need.
I'm not that fond of the Fedora "GPL or bust" policy, but it's not an obstacle for me.
Re:Upgrade path (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Informative)
I just ran into the same problem trying to do a re-install and finally gave up until FC4 final is out. Way to many dependency problems to try to fight through when the real thing is out now. There is some traffic on the fedora-test-list that indicates that some people are having trouble getting the final to install. I'll know more when I get home from work.
Re:What's the difference of posted ISOs? (Score:2, Informative)
~ Jaelle Kitty ~
"It is important that students bring a certain ragamuffin, barefoot, irreverence to their studies; they are not here to worship what is known, but to question it."
- Jacob Chanowski
Re:RPM Working Yet? (Score:2, Informative)
And about some RPM including last known name and version about the RPMs it depends on... it always worked that way, the problem was that you had to solve the dependency tree all by yourself -- something you don't have to do anymore if you use APT.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Informative)
I do understand. That's why I tried to include other MS products.
But here's a revision: "It's perfectly reasonable to compare the two, since they are the latest consumer desktop solutions offerings from Fedora and Microsoft." In any case, they're competing products for the title of "What's the first thing you install on a newly built computer to start using it."
If you're talking about how easy it is to execute and get through the Win XP setup program vs. how easy it is to execute and get through the Fedora setup program, then, even disregarding the fact that a clean and updated Win XP install is much less complete than a clean and updated Fedora install, Fedora's still easier in that it has a fully graphical UI for the install program, unlike windows which uses command line stuff for partition and EULA.
As for the monopoly claim...
http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/04/03/
>bitching about Microsoft shipping Windows with even basic utility software
Bundling Firefox with a distro is not the same as integrating IE into Windows. You can un-check the Firefox box when installing Fedora. You can't uninstall Internet Explorer from Windows.
For the real details on MS's OS/Browser monopoly actions, read http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
Re:Quick question (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Informative)
Small correction: Michael Dell didn't invest 100 million into Redhat; he bought 100 million worth of debt from RedHat. The difference being that he expects RedHat to be financially sound enough to pay back his loan and the interest accumulated from it.
Rather than buying 100 million worth of RedHat stock which would mean, he has faith / believes / or wants to eventually buy out RedHat because he believes this company can grow and create wealth. You have a good argument Steve, this doesn't detract from it much.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Informative)
Sorry, but this just isn't true. We recently costed out some 4-CPU servers running x86. In both cases, Microsoft was cheaper over five years. Granted, we're a Fortune 500 company with large Unix and Windows support groups, so that part was not factored into the equation...but head-to-head on the same hardware, Windows was cheaper. RedHat ES is $800 PER YEAR forever...Windows is a larger cost up front (around $1200 I think) and then some percentage after that (15% or so).
RedHat Enterprise is simply not price-competitive at the low end.
(Yes, I said price-competitive...as always, there are other factors).
Re:Don't bother with Ubuntu (Score:3, Informative)
Hello. I am a mod on the Ubuntu Forum and I run into that problem a lot. That means that the install CD you used was bunk. An OS is much more sensitive than a regular CD so try washing it off then reinstalling or burning a new install cd at lower speeds. Thanks for your time.