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."
Now that Debian's back in the game.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yet again... (Score:1, Insightful)
The problem was they broke the main distribution server: the mirrors hadn't gone live yet so everyone went to the main distribution server.
Here, they're linking to the torrents not a HTTP or FTP download page. That won't crash the Fedora project's server. So what's the problem? Don't you understand bittorrent?
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Insightful)
10 times easier than windows XP?
I think Windows XP installer asks for a grand total for 3 inputs. Computer Name, User Name, and Time Zone.
You bitch about having to download SP2, yet you're installing the most recent version of an operating system (Fedora core 4) against an old version of XP (XP sans SP2, yes you can buy xp with sp2 included). If you installed Fedora Core 3 and wanted to update it to the newest version, you'd have a butload of updating to do also.
If you're not using DHCP, you'd definitely have to manually set up a network connection in ANY OS. Which is very confusing to anyone not familiar with any os.
The fact that your stuff didn't work off the bat is probably because it's specialized hardware, or something very non-standard that probably came with a driver disk for that purpose. If you lost it how is that XP's fault?
I'm not saying Fedora Core 4 isn't easy to install, but don't overdo it.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
The extra minutes you spend setting up before your first login can help ease the amount of mucking around later to change prefs.
Re:Release Notes (Score:1, Insightful)
Personally I use the 'not quite bleeding but still rather sore edge' packages from gentoo, and find more recent versions to be more stable. (Except immidiately after a major version 1.x - 2.0 kind of update.)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
No apps, no security updates, a lot of drivers missing, etc.
Now compare that with the install of a modern Linux distro. See the difference?
Re:Pardon me, why use fedora? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Upgrade path (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's concentrate on the first part of the quote before going on to the second: A semi-production server running FC1. You're running experimental, development code on a sever? Huh? The primary concern with a server is stability and reliability. Secondary to that is performance (if you have a whiz-bang fast server that goes down once a day, you are doing something wrong). Plenty of web sites are still using RedHat 6.2 because it's so stable.
What features could you possibly want on a server that you don't currently have (since you apparently have a functioning system) that you're willing to give up stability for? How have you configured your system that it isn't easy to replace the OS if you need to? My guess is that you aren't really serious about the question, or that you aren't really serious about your server.
So let's try this again: you want to upgrade a system. It has some important stuff on it. And this stuff is so important that you're not willing to back it up (or place it on separate partitions) to be able to do a clean install to ensure you won't have nasty interaction problems between bits of the old OS and new OS plaguing you interminably? You have something important on your computer and you DON'T want to do a clean install?
It's not an off-topic question, its a question that doesn't make any sense, any way you slice it.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure it does. After two reboots and, as usual with windows, it spreads the questioning half way through the install, meaning that unattended installing is a nightmare. Oh, and if you need to change keyboard/language it's a few more questions than that
It might not actually be ten times as difficult to install, MS only manged to make it feel ten times as bloody tedious. With Fedora I answer all the questions up front, and then I can leave. If I don't have to change CDs (e.g. network install) I'll come back to a freshly installed machine. Not so with windows. Two bloody reboots.
And btw that's not just the install, and not just MS but damn near all software that runs on windows. I'll bloody lose it if I have to live through a 'I just remounted the view that you asked me to remount every bloody time I boot the OS and I'll just hang here and wait for you to click "OK" before I'll even continue booting.' I swear I'll take a chair to the helpdesk next time there's an hour long 'update' that requires me to sit at my computer and press 'OK' (often the only choice) every ten bloody minutes, or the install won't go through (including two reboots in the process). I could have actually done something useful with that time, hell I could even have been in a meeting and felt more useful, but no. According to MS we'd all rather be computer operators, sitting attentively at our consoles, answering promptly whenever our service is called for. That's the wrong bloddy way around.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm so sick of this "Linux has no security updates!" FUD.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
10 times easier than windows XP?
Sure.. why not? After you install Windows you get umm.. Windows. After a Windows install (even from an SP2 disk) I generally have to go search around for device drivers and install them, do the Windows update, install software (Office suite, good instant messenger, graphics program, good CD burner app, etc..) and during hte process, hunt down a handful of real long alphanumeric strings that I get to enter to apparently show that I am worthy.
Now Fedora lets see
I think the distros for quite a while have beat Windows for going from 0 to productive. I can do a full Linux install in well under an hour -- I'm lucky to get Windows installed in an hour before thinking about installing the apps that Linux comes with.
I think Windows XP installer asks for a grand total for 3 inputs. Computer Name, User Name, and Time Zone.
Try installing again and let me know how many prompts it takes until you get a useful system where you can get work done.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Not understanding how Bit Torrent works ... (Score:4, Insightful)
The average download rate of a torrent is pretty much independant of the number of downloaders -- that's what's so neat about it. (Compare to downloading via ftp or http -- double the number of downloaders, and you half the average download rate, assuming that you're out of bandwidth in the first place.)
If you've got a torrent being seeded by some fast sites, then adding new downloaders on cable modems (fast download, slow upload) will generally slow the average download down rather than speed it up. But it won't slow down to almost nothing, which is what happens if thousands of people are hitting a ftp or http server ...
Now, if people who are downloading leave their BT clients running after they're done downloading, then the average download rates (of those still downloading, that is) will go up, as there will be more sites seeding at that point.
But in general, merely having more people using BT to download something will not make the average download rates go up. BT is way cool -- don't get me wrong -- I love it. But it's not magic ...
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
I generally have to go search around for device drivers and install them,..
I work in IT, and having installed XP on many new/old desktops and many old/new laptops, nothing has ever come close to XP in regards to device drivers, NOTHING. And to compare that to ANY linux OS is ridiculous. I find it rare when a linix distro can locate ALL device drivers and properly set them up.....
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Insightful)
-matthew
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Insightful)
The solution? Unplug the hard disks power supply, and Windows setup is now happy. I'll take a non-broken installer with a few more clicks (none of which are hard) over that any day.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm already not looking forward to install WinXP on my new all-SATA all-PCI-E computer. I really hope no driver diskettes are involved, namely because I couldn't bear to put a floppy drive in the thing.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
As someone who used redhat through 6.0, 7.0, and 7.1 in a professional capacity, as well as all of the rest of them since 1999, I can tell you that you either have no idea what you're talking about, or you're trolling.
7.1 was a perfectly stable release. It was tested before it was released, and it functioned excellently. As did 7.2. But if you've been using redhat, and you think that RedHat 8 didn't suck, you need to have your head reexamined. Versions of software weren't compatible in the release (for example, it included the newest greatest versions of both mod_perl, and php, neither of which were compatible with apache2.0 at the time, which was included). It was pretty much everything from 7.3, brought up to the latest version available, with no regard for what worked with what other programs.
Also: Redhat had a good business releasing a product for free and selling support and physical media. They weren't terribly profitable, but whatever, they were a good company. Now, their workstation costs $180 PER YEAR minimum. Their server costs $350 PER YEAR minimum. And they didn't even write the software! They just wrote a couple of shell scripts to configure shit for you, and released someone else's work. But, oh wait, fedora's free, and it's pretty good! Yeah, where's the support for it? When redhat 7.1/7.2 etc came out, you could count on several years of software updates for the included packages. Not now - you're lucky to get 6 months out of fedora. And if you need support for Fedora Core1 at this point, the answer is "Upgrade to FC3 or FC4". Well, whatever for your desktop, but for servers? You can't be telling people they need to upgrade their server every 6 months to get updates. And anyone who says Fedora isn't a testbed for Enterprise is delusional.
Come on, people. RedHat shot themselves in the foot. They can't even compete with *MICROSOFT* on price anymore, hell, when you buy 2003 server, you at least get 5 years (plus or minus) of updates included. When you buy Windows XP Pro, you get the same thing. Not to mention, both come with support (such as it is). RedHat doesn't even make a token effort. And if you can't compete with microsoft on pricing and/or support, what's the point? Before you say stability and security, I'd like to first point you to the BSD's, which are free, and better than redhat at both. Hell, solaris is cheaper than RedHat, and it's significantly more stable.
Once people let go of the redhat name, it will die off. It's coasting on name recognition at this point. But redhat's "paradigm shift" or whatever has done more negative for the professional linux community than anything I can ever think of.
~Will
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's hardly a fair comparison.
If I asked Microsoft TODAY to sell me their latest released Desktop OS, what would they sell me? Windows XP SP2, with their bundled apps MS Wordpad, Paint, Notepad, WMP. And if I wanted a MS Distribution comparable to a Linux distro in terms of bundled apps, they'd also offer me MS Office, Windows Movie Maker (free), and MS PLUS for themes, for an additional price.
If I asked the Fedora project TODAY for their latest OS release, I'd get FC4, complete with all their bundled apps.
Competition isn't always fair. MS hasn't released a new OS for a while, but they still want to compete, so Win XP is what they have to offer. It's perfectly reasonable to compare the two, since they're the two latest OS's from Fedora and Microsoft.
Re:What about multimedia? (Score:4, Insightful)
All of that and more is explained at several easily findable and popular FAQ and howto sites specific to Fedora and this issue. I'm not even going to list them but just typing Fedora and mp3 or DVD in google is enough to answer all of your questions.
This isn't a case of me being "shut the f*** up noob! Read the man!" either. Fedora's multimedia policy is easily found and fixed with the most basic of efforts. The fact that you knew about the patent problems and why certain codecs aren't included with Fedora shows your clearly smart enough to figure out the first thing you should have done when you had a question.
"I think that been able to play most widespread audio and video formats (with Xine or Mplayer) should be a key point for a modern linux distro."
Right and Fedora and every other distro out there can do that. You already know why that can't be done with a truly OSS distro so why the fuss? Can XP rip to mp3 and play DVD's right out of the box?
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:5, Insightful)
Please tell that to all of the kernel developers they pay, or gnome, openoffice, GNU GCC and Classpath developers. Don't forget the Apache developers, cygwin, X.org, and the many other developers who Red Hat pays their salaries, costing millions each year, to develop free software. Red Hat is by far the single largest contributor of code to OSS, this is one of the main reasons why their distribution tends to integrate seamlessly together. Also note that Red Hat sells support, try buying that from Microsoft and see how cheap it is, it'll cost you $200 a phone call or you can get some package deal for something like $1200 a year. Red Hat is the lowest price point in the server market, even compared to Novell. This is why Microsoft tries to argue facts based on TCO, they can't compete with Red Hat's low pricing and they know it. You can't just compare initial product costs because no serious corporation buys software without support unless of course their IT department is willing to lose their jobs when shit hits the fan. Red Hat's support has also won many awards because of its quality and has always been a pleasure to deal with. Get your facts straight and stop trolling. Michael Dell just invested $100 million into Red Hat, Michael Dell is a smart businessman and wouldn't just throw money around like that. He sees Red Hat going places. If Red Hat sinks like you want it to, you'll see a huge decrease in open source productivity. They literally pay for some of the brightest engineers to work on this software (most notably Alan Cox)
Regards,
Steve
Re:pre-emptive apt vs rpm rebuttal (Score:4, Insightful)
yum is just about as good as apt. it's a little slow on every system i've used it on.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Exactly, it installs an operating system which I can customise to my hearts content and enough applications for me to run the computer and start downloading/installing other applications I use.
No apps
And you promise not to cry foul or complain when Microsoft include a version of every single application type included in a "standard" Linux distro including their own version of OpenOffice?
Sounds like you would bitch when they don't include applications with their OS just as you would if they did (for monopoly concerns).
no security updates
Are you using Windows 95 or something? Or have you merely totally missed the entire concept of automatic updates in SP2 and Windowsupdate website? I actually rather suspect you are spreading untruths merely to try and achieve your agenda.
a lot of drivers missing
If you mean Linux then I would definitely have to agree with you. If you are comparing Windows to Linux then you have me lost.
Now compare that with the install of a modern Linux distro. See the difference?
Perfectly, I see it like this:
Windows includes a barebones OS and does not include many other applications due to their monopoly status. Linux distributions have an (unfair) advantage in that they can distribute whatever they hell they want with their OS providing it is done legally under copyright law.
Windows has much more out-of-the-box driver support than Linux-based OS's and those which do require additional driver support merely require the user to install a piece of software. With Linux-based distros this may still be the case but the amount of hardware supported and ease of installation of hardware drivers can be significantly harder.
On security updates both sides are generally equal - a good user should keep up to date with security updates in the same way a good driver should make sure he/she has enough oil, gas, tyre-threads etc. Whether you use Windows or a Linux-based distro, the facilities are there for you to keep your system updated.
Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... (Score:2, Insightful)
Web and phone-based comprehensive support
5x12
4 hour response
Unlimited incidents
Try making 1 call into MS about a problem on your server and you'll end up paying more than $180.
And you can still get updates after your subscription runs out, you just can't use RHN. You have to download and install the updated RPMS manually, just like when everyone used NT4.
Or better yet, switch to apt-get.
Re:Best slashdot ever (Score:3, Insightful)