Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Red Hat Software Businesses Software Linux

Fedora Core 2 Schedule Up 224

Posted by CmdrTaco from the stuff-to-download dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Fedora website has posted a schedule for their second release. " Now that the 2.6 Kernel is out, I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fedora Core 2 Schedule Up More

Fedora Core 2 Schedule Up

Comments Filter:

  • Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedora (Score:5, Interesting)

    by the_2nd_coming ( 444906 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:08PM (#7758659) Homepage
    enters freeze. then we can get a system that uses all the features of 2.6 to their max.

  • 2.6.0 RPMs are already out (Score:5, Informative)

    by The One KEA ( 707661 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:09PM (#7758670) Journal
    Arjan van der Ven has a directory here [redhat.com] which has RedHat RPMs available for 2.6 and all of the userspace components needed to run it properly.

  • Sounds like folks are already..... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tcopeland ( 32225 ) * <.tom. .at. .thomasleecopeland.com.> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:10PM (#7758673) Homepage
    ...having good experiences [redhat.com] with the current Fedora release. Good to see this working out.
    • Good grief - I've got boxen sitting all over round here - I've got a few SuSE desktops and several Mandrake servers (interesting problem in itself).

      Now I downloaded Fedora Core 1 the other day with the intention of trying it out on one of our desktop systems.

      Now another core is sceduled for April!

      I can't keep up with this - This must be my penance for all those times I complained when I was an MSCE that the updates were too few and far between.

  • Mmmmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by friendofafriend ( 602350 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:12PM (#7758695)
    This page last modified at: 2003/12/12 18:05:01

    Nothing new here, please move along.

  • Updates: Yes; Default: No. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:15PM (#7758716)
    Updates will be out, yes, but most distributions have already had 2.6 updates available as a "No, it's not ready yet, but here you go."

    Remember how fun 2.4 was when it first came out?

    Yeah.

  • Hopefully Not (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Joel Carr ( 693662 )
    Personally I hope other distros don't change their release schedules around the new kernel. I think it would be foolish for a distro to release a product running on 2.6.0 as default. Best to stick with the 2.4.x series and have the 2.6.x series available as an unsupported extra to avoid any nasty surprises.

    Hence if the next release of a distro was to be built on 2.4.x with 2.6 development kernel included, there is likely no need for a change in release schedule.

    ---

    • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GrenDel Fuego ( 2558 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:26PM (#7758807)
      Fedora is basically Redhat's testbed for new technology, so it makes perfect sense for them to push out 2.6 this quickly.
      • Yes I agree, but in relation to the comment:
        I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon
        I still hope not.

        ---

        • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Informative)

          by Alan Cox ( 27532 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:35PM (#7758862) Homepage
          There is plenty of time between now and when FC2 is released for that kernel to stabilize further and old drivers get tidied up (if anyone actually uses them any more). The core stuff is looking very solid and passes test suites that killed early 2.4.x
          • One of the major reasons I (and many other people) use Linux is because of its support for older and slower hardware. I can run Linux my 486 with two 10Mbit ISA nics as a home router and everything is hunky-dory. I, for one, hope that they keep the older drivers going for as long as possible. It'd be nice if someone could just provide a wrapper to keep old drivers working after they're no longer supported.
      • it is a test bed, but it is not rawhide. it is a normal user distrobution. everything is stable and works well. the test bed is just a place for issues to be workedout on system design.

  • whats the schedual for 2.7? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:23PM (#7758780)
    we have had 2.6 for a number of hours now, its time to move on... whats the schedual for 2.7 or 2.8?

  • 2.6.0 experiences (Score:5, Informative)

    by xchino ( 591175 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:23PM (#7758782)
    I know alot of this was mentioned last night when the story of the kernel release came out, but I thought I'd mention it anyways.

    There are two new interfaces to configuring the kernel. xconfig (based on QT) and gconfig, as well as the old menuconfig. I only tried xconfig and menuconfig, but they both worked fine and more quickly than their predecessors.

    When compiling your kernel, drop the make dep and make clean and just #make bzImage modules modules_install. It might just be my imagination, but it seems like it took half the time to compile 2.6.0 and modules as it did for 2.4.23-pre6 which I was using.

    If you get an error message like QM_MODULES: Function not implemented you haven't gotten the module-init-tools for 2.6.0 installed.

    Nvidia users need to patch the nvidia-kernel sources with the appropriate diff from http://www.minion.de [minion.de] and apply before installing your new nvidia.o. My install went like this (Gentoo 1.4):
    1. Get the nvidia-kernel package
    #emerge -f nvidia-kernel
    (if it's not already is /usr/portage/distfile)
    2. Extract nvidia-kernel
    #sh NVIDIA-Linux-...-pk0 --extract-only
    3. Patch driver
    #cd usr/src/nv
    #patch -p1 NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
    #ln -s Makefile.kbuild Makefile
    #make install

    Hope this helps someone out there, I spent an hour or two googling to figure this out, so I hope I can save someone the trouble :)

    • Re:2.6.0 experiences (Score:5, Informative)

      by The Analog Kid ( 565327 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:39PM (#7758886)
      If your using Gentoo, then just emerge nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx, and portage will autodetect you running the 2.6 kernel and automatically patch it for you.
      • I sync every night a 3:30am CST, and last night this did not work for me. I'm not sure what caused it not to work, as everything was fetched and installed okay, yet x would not run using the nvida driver, only using nv.o would work. Upon examination it appeared not to have applied the patch. This may be due to a problem elsewhere in my configuration, but I suspect if it is, then someone else may have the same problem,
    • When compiling your kernel, drop the make dep and make clean and just #make bzImage modules modules_install.

      No need for 'make bzImage modules'
      simple 'make' will do the two automatically in a single run

      much better
    • Or just get yourself a slightly older Radeon chipset (9200 or older) and use the free software DRI drivers.

    • > #patch -p1 NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
      That should be:
      #patch -p1 < NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
      Hurrah slashcode ;-)

  • WTF? Fedora Schedule? Windows XP SP 2 Changelist? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Stop that. Now. Or I'll post my New Year's decision list.

    You have been warned.

  • Debian Press Release (Score:5, Funny)

    by SparkMan ( 4115 ) * on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:28PM (#7758817)
    In response to the recent release of kernel 2.6.0, Debian is accelerating their development cycle and plans to immediately release a stable distribution containing the new kernel. Look for this new version sometime in 2005.


    (actually I'm a big fan of Debian but they gotta do something about their 2-year release cycles)
    • why? windows can get away with 2 years...and they are getting away with 5 years now.

      • Re:Debian Press Release (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SparkMan ( 4115 ) * on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:58PM (#7759002)
        I'll tell you why.

        Because I love and use Debian, but contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business. So, I have to use the stable build, which has many good qualities, but as others have noted... kernel 2.2 as the default kernel?!? X Window System is a P.I.T.A. for anybody but an X god and forget about detecting my Radeon. GCC in stable is so old that there are ANSI compatibility problems. etc. etc. And no, package pinning does NOT solve any of this.

        I absolutely despise Windows, but at least I can run recent compilers on Windows 98 without having to compile the compilers myself. At least the latest games still work.

        I'm not merely complaining idly. If I could pay $50 for a stable version of Debian that worked right, had reasonably modern versions of everything, and was still idealistically free, I'd be first in line with my checkbook.

        • Re:Debian Press Release (Score:3, Interesting)

          by ninjaz ( 1202 )
          Debian Planet has a news article pointing to an in-progress OSNews series of reviews: http://debianplanet.org/node.php?id=1025 [debianplanet.org] It focuses on the different Debian-based distributions.

          I had the same problems with the 2-year release cycle. I'm convinced this is due to the core OS being held back from release while every random application with a critical bug is stabilized (the tail wagging the dog), and the apps should be decoupled a bit. That is, something like how FreeBSD does it with a solid core, an

          • There are a few non-free components included. But they can be removed if you choose to do so.

            The non-free components are the "Adminmenu" utility, and a few icons and splash screens. (And a Debian dist-upgrade has been know to remove the Adminmenu without people intending it to..though that's never happened to me.)

            Here's my quick check for the packages involved:

            $ dpkg -l | grep Libranet
            ii adminmenu 0.7.37-1 Libranet Adminmenu
            ii gdm-theme-libr 2.8.1-1 Libranet GDM login themes
            ii libr
        • I think you have the wrong idea about debian. Stable isn't about playing games, it's not about using for a business desktop. It's not even about development. It's about being very stable and very secure. It's the kind of distribution you want running your ISP's webservers. Everything else, other than stability and security, is irrelevant to stable. The only changes they make to it are bugfixes. If you want to run a 2.4 kernel with stable it's very easy - unpack the tarball, drop in your .config, do 'make-kp
          • Woody does have binary images of the 2.4 kernel. 2.4 simply isn't the default.
        • Because I love and use Debian, but contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business. So, I have to use the stable build, which has many good qualities, but as others have noted... kernel 2.2 as the default kernel?!?

          Same here. I got tired of the ancient software in the stable versions of Debian and the constant "use backports from unstable or run testing" comments when this issue got raised. Since then I have switched to SuSE. I'm still get

        • Unstable, I assume, is unready for serious business. Testing...it really depends on what your serious business is. I probably wouldn't want to use it as a 24/7 system (though that *does* depend on the downside risk...my system is effectively up 24 hours a day for 7 days a week, but I take it down every once in awhile).

          OTOH, if it's a server box sitting in a back room, what's wrong with stable?

          With testing, if you want a stable system, then disable all upgrades except for security patches. Then you have
          • Testing is very nearly comparable in stability to the stable branch, and is equal to or exceeds the stability of many other distributions. That is not really the problem with using testing.

            The problem with testing is that the Debian Security Team does not specifically provide security updates for it. Thus, if a package in testing has a security issue, the fix for that security issue will not be in testing until the normal, automatic, procedure for transferring packages from unstable to testing takes place.

        • contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business.

          Maybe I'm one of the aforementioned fanatics, but I've been using unstable for serious software development for about two years now. There are only two "problems" I have with it, and neither of them has anything to do with reliability. For that matter, neither of them has anything to do with Debian, per se, they're problems that arise from being "non-standard".

          The first problem is packa

    • (actually I'm a big fan of Debian but they gotta do something about their 2-year release cycles)

      Why? I'm 2.4.something on two boxes here at home. Both are Debian testing (one should have been stable, but I forgot when setting up /etc/apt/sources.list). If it does what you want, why upgrade?

    • I just compiled the 2.6.0 kernel on my Woody system running on an centaurhauls processor (VIA C3) and it runs with no problems at all!

      I even get the feeling it is faster (but perception helps a lot).
    • look for this new version sometime in 2005.

      That's still before Longhorn. :P

    • Re:Debian Press Release (Score:4, Insightful)

      by swillden ( 191260 ) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Friday December 19, 2003 @01:45AM (#7761679) Journal

      In response to the recent release of kernel 2.6.0, Debian is accelerating their development cycle and plans to immediately release a stable distribution containing the new kernel. Look for this new version sometime in 2005.

      Actually, 2005 is about right.

      What just released is 2.6.0. Looking at the past history of kernel releases -- or even just reading the comments of kernel developers about this release -- you'd have to be an absolute fool to put this on an an important production server now.

      It's important to understand the Linux kernel release cycle. When Linus cuts loose a "stable" release, that does not mean that it's stable in the sense of "reliable", it means it's stable in the sense that developers aren't going to be hacking the guts apart (well, excepting the 2.4 VM thing, which actually supports my point). There are going to be problems for a while, and that's just part of the process.

      Nope, if your workload is important, you'll want to wait a few minor versions. From what I read on LKML, the developers think that 2.6 will stabilize a lot faster than 2.4 did, because 2.6.0 is a lot more solid that 2.4.0 was, but you still probably shouldn't even think about it for serious production work until at least 2.6.5, and even then you'd better test the crap out of it (never a bad idea anyway).

      So, figure that about six months from now, 2.6 will be solid enough to be the default kernel in less conservative distributions. At that point, Debian will be watching how well everyone else fares with it. A year or so later, they'll have some confidence that it's trustworthy. The next release after that, it will probably be the default. In the meantime, 2.6 will probably be available in woody fairly soon, and is already available in sarge, though it's very unlikely to be the default when sarge is released.

      Meanwhile, one of my Debian unstable boxes is happily running a Debian-provided 2.6 and has been for a couple of months now.

  • From the website:
    ...there is one new function in Gnome which I hope makes it to the final release due sometime in November 2003. It's the ability to change your X screen resolution without having to restart X
    Does anyone know if there will be a feature that allows you to enable another monitor via Xinerema without having to restart X?

  • Positive so far on Fedora (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:35PM (#7758868)
    There have been complaints about the stability of some Fedora 1 components but by and large I commend RedHat for further freeing their user-oriented distro by unencumbering the copyright issues that caused PinkTie etc to spring forth.

    I think /. should replace the RedHat logo since there is a clear distinction between the Fedora product and RedHat's primary branded offering, and this would also recognize the community of non-RedHat employees contributing to Fedora.

  • Updates Soon? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sflory ( 2747 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:36PM (#7758880)
    There will be unofficial updates for testing, but the big boys will holding off for months. Doesn't anyone remember the pain and suffering of 2.4.0-2.4.12? Linus and co ripped out, and replaced the vm code twice in the 2.4.0 to 2.4.11 time frame.

    Red Hat didn't release a 2.4 kernel untill 2.4.7, and pretty much everyone considered it broken. Sure gentoo and the rest of the bleeding edge are already running 2.6.

    • But don't forget that what Fedora is for. To be the bleeding edge, the cannon fodder for Enterprise. However, I welcome the chance to be Fedora cannon fodder. Hmmmm ... 2.6.

    • here goes my karma ......

      Gentoo is a Linux from Scratch based distro, as such it is what you make of it. I know quite a few people who are running gentoo who have no intention of upgrading to 2.6 until at least the majority of reports confirm that shit is for the most part working.
    • Linus and co ripped out [...] i think they've learned their lesson and try everything to avoid that pain. 2.6 will probably stabalize much faster than 2.4 (see also Alan Cox' post).

      /graf0z.

  • fedora screenshot [dark-hill.co.uk] from Fedora 2 Test Screenshots [dark-hill.co.uk].

    I must care more about my eyes...
    • those are screenshots of the prereleases of fedora core 1

      just like the trollpost above... i wonder how much attention the moderators are spending on verification of the links.
      • those are screenshots of the prereleases of fedora core 1
        just like the trollpost above... i wonder how much attention the moderators are spending on verification of the links.

        oops. sorry, I just wanted to share my shock with others when I saw on a linux screenshot [dark-hill.co.uk] a sentence (in capital letters) 'we love bill gates'....
        • sorry, i was just so annoyed by the obvious troll [slashdot.org] from amsterdam vallon (at the moment at +4), who linked the same screenshots as you....

          i automatically assumed the worst about your post. my apologies.

  • Funny name.. core (Score:5, Funny)

    by cyb97 ( 520582 ) <cyb97@noxtension.com> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @06:50PM (#7758957) Homepage Journal
    The word core makes me instantly think of core-dumps... Kind of like if Microsoft named their next Windows version "Microsoft BlueScreen"
    • "The word core makes me instantly think of core-dumps"

      Well then you may be interested in the actual origin of the term core dump. Waaaaay back when, RAM was just a big box with cris-crossing wires strung through washer-shaped magnets. The charges in the wires would cause the magnets to physically flip over when you set the 'bits'. This was called 'core memory'. And no, I'm not that old, it's what my professor told me.

      • Re:Funny name.. core (Score:2, Interesting)

        by NateTech ( 50881 )
        I'm not that old either, but I have a piece of core memory lying around here somewhere that someone gave to me and I also can Google, and I can assure you - the ferrite donuts (cores) don't move.

        I think this calls for a plonk! and an STFW.

        It's electromagnetic changes, silly -- just like today's RAM, only much much much bigger and with stranger problems. (Like core heating due to the resistance of the wires and other fun stuff.)
  • Now that the 2.6 Kernel is out, I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon...

    ... which will sit on the shelves if anyone is smart. Linus himself has said he'd wait until an update. No point in rushing. The kernel isn't going anywhere.

  • I am interested to know what is happening with "Export Approval". Are they removing code to make BXA happy? Just what demands/changes/modifications are being made to "comply" with export controls?

Slashdot Top Deals

After all is said and done, a hell of a lot more is said than done.

Close