Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Red Hat Software Businesses Software Linux

Fedora 7 Released 186

Posted by kdawson
from the get-yer-fresh-bits dept.
fedoraman writes "Fedora 7 has been released. With Xorg 7.3, KDE 3.5.6, GNOME 2.18, and version 2.6.21 of the Linux kernel Fedora 7 comes with all the latest and greatest open source desktop software. Fedora 7 drops the traditional 'Core' nomenclature, since it includes both what used to be termed the Core and Extra components by default. Fedora 7 is also the first release to be constructed with Fedora's revolutionary new build system, which is designed to improve the ease of developing derivatives and Fedora-based software appliances. As usual, extensive documentation and release notes are available. Torrents are also available and ISO images can be downloaded from mirrors around the world."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fedora 7 Released

Comments Filter:
  • by yog (19073) *
    That's nice. I guess I'll try it out on a live DVD some time. I have been a Redhat/Fedora user for 9 years, but unfortunately FC6 was unable to load on my latest PC with an Intel 965 motherboard, so I had to switch to OpenSUSE 10.2 [opensuse.org].

    OpenSUSE has taken some getting used to--YaST admin/update tool, Beagle instead of the locate tool, some interesting tweaks in the UI, European defaults for certain settings such as Ghostscript paper size that I had to track down and adjust. Furthermore, it seems to be a bi
    • That's nice. I guess I'll try it out on a live DVD some time. I have been a Redhat/Fedora user for 9 years, but unfortunately FC6 was unable to load on my latest PC with an Intel 965 motherboard, so I had to switch,....

      Tell me about it!

      I have a PII with 64MB of RAM and, so far, the only hing that works well is RH 8! Which, believe it or not, is still pretty good for what I do - testing my code for my business' website. (All I do is HTML and some PHP nothing major.)

      I tried Ubuntu 6.1, but it didn't quite w

      • by dosius (230542) <bridget@buric.co> on Thursday May 31, 2007 @12:50PM (#19339497) Journal
        The last version of Debian worked on a 486/133 with 32 MB RAM, I'm sure the current ought to too...

        -uso.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by gfxguy (98788)
        I noticed when I upgraded from FC4 to FC6 a lot of hardware that was recognized in 4 suddenly wasn't in 6. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

        I've tried the latest Ubuntu, and it's installing on my laptop (have had it on my desktop for a week now, and am very happy) as I come across this article... I'm going to stick with Ubuntu.

        I've used FC for a couple of years now, though, and I have to give it props, they've been excellent, overall. If I hadn't just done all the installing I've done, I'd be willing
      • If you don't actually need Linux specifically, there is always the BSDs. They tend to have quite a bit more modest requirements, while still being current. Otherwise, did you try Gentoo?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jmyers (208878)
      "It seems to me they've fallen a little behind in the way they integrate the kernel and UI aspects of the Linux system, and Fedora has always required a fair amount of tweaking to get things like multimedia to work up to snuff"

      I don't think they have fallen behind at all. The lack of mp3 support and other non-free software is a policy decision and I think it is a good one. I have tried Ubuntu and the only difference I can tell as an end user is the inclusion of the non-free software and drivers. This is ve
      • by jZnat (793348) *
        The only proprietary/non-free blobs that are included in Ubuntu et al. are some hardware firmware. Ubuntu is committed to being a free distribution, but it does make it easy to install non-free (both proprietary and patent-encumbered) software if the user wishes to do so.
    • by crush (19364) on Thursday May 31, 2007 @12:37PM (#19339335)

      The complete build process is FL/OSS!

      The tool for taking all the RPM packages and composing them into an installation tree is pungi [fedoraproject.org]. It's FL/OSS.

      The tool for taking source from CVS and turning it into packages is Koji [fedoraproject.org] and it's completely FL/OSS too

      The tool for producing updated packages is bodhi [fedoraproject.org] and is FL/OSS

      Be happy. The Fedora Project yet again has made major contributions to FL/OSS which can be enjoyed and improved by everyone. It means that Fedora is completely independent of Red Hat (apart from Red Hat's very generous donation of hardware and developers) and that anyone that wants to can easily produce a specialised "spin" of Fedora suited exactly to their own needs. That's one of the main innovations that Fedora is pursuing with the above: instead of being stuck dependent on the choices of a distributor you can benefit from the patched sources, even their packaging, yet diverge when needed. This should be the goal that every distribution follows, and the only thing that is similar in terms of flexibility is Gentoo, but that IMHO fails to provide an easy path for those that are happy with a distributor making the decisions for them.

      I'll freely admit to being a Fedora and Red Hat fan, but I hope that the significance of the release of these build tools is not overlooked by people using other distributions.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by crush (19364)
        Even if you're not interested in using Koji locally for your own purposes and just want to find out what the status of your favorite package is you can look at it on Fedora's Koji server. Click a package name on the left and you can see what patches have been applied according to the cnangelog and whether the package is being rebuilt, or waiting on review or whatever. It's superb.
      • by yog (19073) *
        I'm very pleased to hear about these packaging tools, and overall I really respect fedora. Unfortunately, I did have a hardware problem with FC6 and was forced to try a different distribution, just to get my workstation up and running. I have heard of many others with similar issues over at fedoraforum.org. I hope F7 has fixed this because I like the fact that they tend to have the latest and greatest kernel releases and the whole Fedora system just feels well laid out (after years of familiarity of cour
      • by NuShrike (561140)
        Congratulations Fedora/RedHat on discovering Ports/pkgsrc, and BSD's rebuilding from tagged CVS source.
    • I found updating software via the YaST admin/update tool to be slooooww, but other than that Open SuSe 10 isn't too bad.

  • by isa-kuruption (317695) <kuruption@[ ]uption.net ['kur' in gap]> on Thursday May 31, 2007 @12:12PM (#19338935) Homepage
    Not even x.org has 7.3 yet! Fedora is really on top of things!

    • From X.org's wiki [x.org]:

      The current development release is 7.3, currently scheduled to be released in May.
      Well, end of May is kind of today. So it is theorically possible that Fedora 7 ships with it.
      • Okay so the main page says "check out the release schedule" and then when I got to the release schedule it doesn't list 7.3 at all. Well, huh, so I am to assume that 7.3 doesnt exist at all let alone about to be released.

        I guess I needed to check the 'changes' document which mentions the release schedule, or well, not a schedule but some arbitrary date it could be released.

        Looks like Xorg needs to fix and update their documentation!
        • by lymond01 (314120)
          Xorg, as they should, uses the OpenSource Linux format for storing information:

          "Say, Paul, where'd you install that software?"
          "It's in /opt. No..wait. I put that one in /usr/local. Or did I actually just install it in my home? Which box are you sitting at?"

          Not sayin' everyone needs a /programs folder, but it would be nice to have some of the guesswork taken out of things. Then document it in a similar fashion. :-)
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by xenocide2 (231786)
            Allow me to introduce you to two very fun programs, "which" and "find". Which prints out where a program in your path is. This is useful when you install a new version and cant seem to run it, or for Paul to tell his coworker where he installed something. Find will search a specified tree for the properties you want, like perhaps the name of the file and executable permission.
            • by donaldm (919619)
              Just run "updatedb" which may take a few minutes but should be ran regularly on a daily? or hourly? basis then run "locate" with a search string and it is very fast. Nothing wrong with "find" since you can do so much more with it, it is just that "locate" will be faster (usually within a second) to find a pattern over all file-systems.

              Actually "which", "whence" and "whereis" may not be very helpful since in the majority of cases these depend on your PATH variable and different people may have different path
          • by jZnat (793348) *
            Well, there's a pretty simple system to follow: /usr holds the distro-maintained software (or just the bare minimum software), and /usr/local contains locally installed software (i.e., compiled from source). /opt is there for historical reasons really...
          • "it would be nice to have some of the guesswork taken out of things. Then document it in a similar fashion. :-)"

            It has been done for years, Mr. lymond01: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ [pathname.com]
  • by c0l0 (826165) * on Thursday May 31, 2007 @12:15PM (#19338991) Homepage
    It's not Xorg 7.3 that's packaged with Fedora, but Xorg 7.2 with the xorg-server 1.3.0 release. It still features very interesting software, like, for example, noveau [freedesktop.org], a free reimplementation of NVIDIA's hardware-accelerated 3D-drivers (still work in progress, of course), as well as a kernel patched with the all-new and highly anticipated mac802.11 [intellinuxwireless.org]-subsystem that whould yield much better compatibility and performance for all things WLAN. I also like this idea of "Revisor [heise.de]", an application easily allowing for building customized bootable (install-)media with specific packages only.
    • by Lockejaw (955650)

      as well as a kernel patched with the all-new and highly anticipated mac802.11-subsystem
      I shall have to try this. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a ppc live disk, though I do have a USB drive I could try installing it on.
  • by sconeu (64226)
    Can't find the release notes, they're already 404'ed from slashdotting.
  • 404 Not Found (Score:1, Redundant)

    by JungleBoy (7578)
    release notes: 404 Not Found

    Go slashdot Editors! Way to earn that paycheck! Keep up the hard work.
  • http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats [fedoraproject.org] I'm pretty sure those are quite similar to what we would have found on the 404'ed Release Notes page.
  • EFI? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by pete-classic (75983)
    I don't see EFI boot in the notes. Is this really still not supported?

    -Peter

    • I wonder why this was modded "troll". I really have an EFI system, and I really want to run Fedora on it (without bootcamp). It really seems to remain unsupported on x86 32.

      Was it really something I said? Or is the moderator the troll?

      -Peter
      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        Was it really something I said? Or is the moderator the troll?

        It's because you put really into italics, and some Fedora fanboy (of which there are many here) modded you down for saying something disparaging about their beloved distribution.

        Fedora is second only to Apple in this regard, but oddly, it seems to only be one FRCH ahead of Windows. I remember a day when defending Windows around here was the thing that got you modded down, not attacking it.

  • Was already 404ed (Score:2, Informative)

    by stoomart (1092733)
    The release notes page was already hosed before this hit slashdot. Go here. [redhat.com]
  • On the several sites I have so far explored, I see no ISO images. Moreover, the folders are labeled up through v6, with v7 apparently in the development folder. Score another point for the sloppiness of Linux distros....
  • Sorry CD Users (Score:3, Informative)

    by Kainaw (676073) on Thursday May 31, 2007 @01:04PM (#19339739) Homepage Journal
    Fedora 7 is released with a DVD iso. If you need the set of CD isos, sorry. You'll have to wait to see if anyone is nice enough to create them in the future. You can try to use the rescue cd and a network install, but again, you'll have to wait until the bandwidth opens up enough for that. So, either upgrade your computer or stick with FC6.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by pembo13 (770295)
      The LiveCDs aren't CDs?
      • Re:Sorry CD Users (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Kainaw (676073) on Thursday May 31, 2007 @02:17PM (#19341129) Homepage Journal
        The LiveCDs aren't CDs?

        No. They are not. I want a set of CDs with all the RPMs on them (just as I had with FC2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). The LiveCDs have a minimal Fedora install. If you want to put it on your computer (and toss out the CD), you need to do a network install. I have 17 computers here. I don't want to wait hours and hours for a network install on each one.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Waffle Iron (339739)
          1. Download the DVD ISO into one computer on your LAN
          2. Mount the ISO filesystem image on a loop device
          3. Turn on an FTP daemon to serve up the DVD files
          4. Tell the 17 computers to do an FTP-based install over your lan
          I've done this. It's faster than a DVD or CD install because you don't have to deal with an optical drive's abysmal seek latency. And no swapping CDs for hours.
          • I've done nearly the same thing but with an NFS mount instead of an FTP server and it is much faster than optical drives. (It was also a suse install but same idea I think.)
          • by juhaz (110830)
            Alternatively, if you're installing only for one computer or otherwise don't want to run a server, you can just save the iso file somewhere on local hard disk and tell the installer the location.
        • by dbIII (701233)
          The network installs on earlier Fedora releases were a lot faster than from CDROM - I would recommend doing that if you are installing it on more than a couple of machines. Even on 100Mb/s it took a lot less than an hour for the slowest install. CDs are very slow - accessing a hard drive via NFS is a lot faster. The CDs are handy to take offsite which is why I have CD images of the previous releases - but the entire lot goes onto a drive (copied from six machines at once last time because I could) to do
    • Seriously, I have one word of advice: NETWORK.
      Network installs are so much less painful.
      • by mauriatm (531406)

        Doesn't that imply one has a network setup that can perform such an install?

        I've had a DVD-ROM for years, but I would always download the CD ISO file. I would only burn CD#1 to a CD-RW and load the rest using a hard drive install. Very very fast. It was better back in the days when I could do it with a 3.5 floppy disk. The annoying thing about the testing process for Fedora 7 was that I had to download a DVD image every time and burn it to a DVD-RW (to spare creating a toaster DVD every month, but it toast

    • by scottv67 (731709)
      Fedora 7 is released with a DVD iso. If you need the set of CD isos, sorry. You'll have to wait to see if anyone is nice enough to create them in the future. You can try to use the rescue cd and a network install, but again, you'll have to wait until the bandwidth opens up enough for that. So, either upgrade your computer or stick with FC6.

      Why not download the DVD ISO and then extract all of the files from that ISO file to a directory on a local ftp or http server on your network? Then use the "network
  • Fedora Security (Score:4, Insightful)

    by macemoneta (154740) on Thursday May 31, 2007 @04:19PM (#19343151) Homepage
    I'm surprised that no one has mentioned one of Fedora's major strengths; security [fedoraproject.org]. This is the primary reason that I use Fedora. The combination of security layers has made Fedora immune to many (all?) of the compromises/exploits in recent history.

    While distributions like Ubuntu are more popular with end-users, I'm concerned that an exploit across such a popular (but security weak) distribution will paint all of Linux with an unfavorable brush.
    • by drinkypoo (153816)

      While distributions like Ubuntu are more popular with end-users, I'm concerned that an exploit across such a popular (but security weak) distribution will paint all of Linux with an unfavorable brush.

      I'm concerned about Ubuntu security myself. There is/was a selinux project within Ubuntu, but the last update was a reference to how it wouldn't be included in dapper (no mention of Feisty) and an email I sent to the supposed lead contact on the project received no response, so I guess we can assume that it is

    • by init100 (915886)

      While distributions like Ubuntu are more popular with end-users, I'm concerned that an exploit across such a popular (but security weak) distribution will paint all of Linux with an unfavorable brush.

      I agree. If they want to be the poster child for Linux, they sure have to put their act together.

  • by Builder (103701) on Thursday May 31, 2007 @04:53PM (#19343637)
    I posted a somewhat trollish comment about this earlier today. Nice to see that the fanbois made it out in such good time on this one to defend the indefensible. Good to see we leap to attack people instead of considering the actions of the Fedora project and their associated projects.

    What most people are completely missing in their ad hominem attacks on my earlier thread is that when a lot of people installed FC5, there was an expectation that it would be supported for 2 years through the Fedora Legacy project. On February 9 2007, this project ceased to exist, giving people just 4 months to migrate their servers.

    If Microsoft suddenly halved the supported lifespan of products currently in production, they would be crucified by the very people attacking me on this site. But when an open source project does this, it's ok.

    You can call the people who installed FC5 idiots all you want, but they're not. They trusted this 'community' that they kept being preached at about. "When a company goes under, you're screwed, but with community supported products, you're never forced to upgrade" - That sound familiar to anyone here? You ever told anyone that? You ever heard that line of bullshit from someone ?

    A lot of people figured 2 years was an acceptable lifespan for the product because it fits well with hardware refresh cycles on older equipment. Then half way through their 2 year server lifecycle, they had the rug pulled out from under them. On a date when they thought they had about 11 - 13 months support left, they got told that they have 4 months to do a complete migration.

    Calling people who trusted you an idiot for believing you does not convert people to Linux!

    I made one mistake in my earlier post - I said that support for FC5 ends today. It turns out that it still has a month to go, so I'll apologise for that. But the Fedora community has let a lot of people down today and given Microsoft a load more useful FUD fuel.

    Every time something like this happens, MS have some more examples of how this community will turn on you in a heartbeat. When the Tuttle Centos issue happened, MS were taking the response of the 'community' into sales meetings where Linux was a threat. When a Squirrelmail developer called for an end-user to be fired and belittled her in public for daring to use contact details posted on the Squirrelmail site when she didn't know where else to turn, MS smiled with glee (and a small white cat). And you can bet your bottom dollar that someone at MS will be pointing out this latest gaff to someone in the PR department and they'll be using this behind closed doors in the near future too.

    You probably don't care - you probably know better. But somewhere, some PHB who could have been converted to Linux will become an even firmer closed source supporter because of the actions of the Fedora and Fedora legacy projects that come into effect today. And when you're fighting a monopolist, every sale or install that you give up through rudeness, through arrogance and most especially through broken promises and lies is one install too many!

    I'll say it again - If Microsoft suddenly halved the supported lifespan of products currently in production, they would be crucified by the very people attacking me on this site. But when an open source project does this, it's ok. Why?
    • Writing a long passage does not change the fact you installed something experimental on a production server. Do you install a random CS research project from a university in your production server, and complain to that university when they are not supporting you? (say, because the Ph.D student who was responsible just graduated and went to Google)

      It is ok for an open source project to do this because the open source project have never given you any guarantees in the first place. No guarantees, it is writ
    • You want server level stability - no problem, you have RHEL or Centos.

      However, I understand you. It used to be that we had functional releases followed by a series of patch releases. The patch releases would continue for much longer than the next functional release. Fed Legacy seemd to be an attempt in this direction but they ran out of bandwidth and there is always RHEL/Centos where they would rather push you.

UNIX is many things to many people, but it's never been everything to anybody.

Working...