Fedora Core 2 test1 Released 369
GerritHoll writes "A test release of Fedora Core 2 is now
available
from Red Hat and at distinguished mirror sites near you, and is also
available in the torrent.
Fedora Core has expanded in this release to four binary ISO images
and four source ISO images.
This test release is specifically designed for testing the 2.6 kernel,
GNOME 2.5, and KDE 3.2. Please file bugs via
Bugzilla,
Product Fedora Core, Version test1,
Architecture i386 so that they are noticed and appropriately
classified. Discuss this test release on
fedora-test-list."
I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:4, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, but by the time you're done building it, FC2 will be released.
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:2)
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:5, Informative)
Release date of FC2: april 6
so yes, Gnome will be 2.6, and I don't see a problem with test release of Linux using test release of Gnome, because in the end both will be final for release.
Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge (Score:5, Funny)
Actually Gnomes with a little butter, rosemary and garlic can be quite savory.
They've released development stuff before (Score:2, Informative)
The notorious gcc debacle [slashdot.org] with Red Hat 7.0 comes to mind...
Re:They've released development stuff before (Score:2, Informative)
Huge (Score:5, Insightful)
Fedora Core has expanded in this release to four binary ISO images...
Ugh. Looks like my modem will be getting a workout again soon. Wouldn't it be easier to skimp on some of the apps, and provide separate links to them so we can reduce download times? Four ISO discs is hella big.
Re:Huge (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Huge (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Huge (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Huge (Score:4, Informative)
In FC1 however you can end up needing disc3 if you select some other language support as disc3 has locale specific bits on it
Re:Huge (Score:2)
Re:Huge (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Huge (Score:2)
Can anyone confirm this?
* only yum is installed by default, apt-get you have to snag from http://freshrpms.net/
Re:Huge (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Huge (Score:5, Informative)
Nautilus crashes on logoff, and I seem to have some acpi issues on my laptop, but it looks really cool. A lot of New stuff and much better GUIs.
Just my 2 cents.
apt-get and yum? (Score:3, Interesting)
So how do I add a magic line to my sources.list or yum.conf to allow me to upgrade to this 'release'? Will upgrading be as easy as apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade ?
Re:apt-get and yum? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:apt-get and yum? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:apt-get and yum? (Score:5, Informative)
That said you probably can do it anyway.
Re:apt-get and yum? (Score:4, Insightful)
name=Fedora Core $releasever - Development Tree
baseurl=http://mirror.dulug.duke.edu/pub/fe
in
As always, there's no guarantee that any of that will work with test releases, although for FC1 I went from test1,2,3, and then to final using yum and had no issues.
Would it not be (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Would it not be (Score:3, Funny)
What about (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What about (Score:3, Funny)
> about that, hrmmm?
Because Mandrake, like BSD and Apple, is dying, and will continue to do so for the next 20 years.
Silly question (Score:3, Interesting)
thanks
Re:Silly question (Score:3, Informative)
Use a mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Use a mirror (Score:5, Funny)
Duh, so the part-timers who just happened to load the page before me can get the slow-ass version while the appropriately "hidden" mirror sites [redhat.com] remain speedy and fast for me.
Re:Use a mirror (Score:4, Informative)
i386 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:i386 (Score:5, Informative)
anthing else is a exercise in gentoo masterbation.
Re:i386 (Score:5, Funny)
Re:i386 (Score:2)
i686 should be the default build and special low-end builds could be made for i386. I'd say i386 is more the exception than the rule.
There is a reason. (Score:3, Informative)
For the rest, I believe it was found that compiling general user-space applications for i686 makes only a miniscule difference, if any.
Some misconceptions (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:i386 (Score:2)
Re:i386 (Score:5, Informative)
I know because I've tried both.
Then why... (Score:2, Informative)
Not sure... (Score:5, Interesting)
My results show that there was no significant difference between the 3 of them (No, I didn't do a stage 1, I did stage 3 and even that took longer than I wanted).
The interesting thing was that RHEL WS burned through the RAM and started swapping a LOT sooner than Fedora or Gentoo, I was able to apply 4 times the load before Fedora and Gentoo started swapping.
RHEL was slightly faster 1-1.5 transactions/sec. But as we know once your web server starts using the swap you might as well pull the plug.
Dsiclaimer: I should have tested Gentoo using a Stage 1 install and I may do that before I make a final decision.
The test consisted of a production environment as I would normally use, the load was applied using siege [joedog.org].
And to avoid the flames, if someone has tuning ideas for either Fedora or Gentoo for a general purpose (apache/php/db) box I'll be more than happy to listen.
Re:i386 (Score:2)
Re:i386 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i386 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i386 (Score:3, Informative)
I'd be interested to see if specifying -march=i586 resulted in any significant speed increase. I doubt it would be significant. For code which does appear to be sensitive to optimizations, they do provide -march=i686 compiled RPMs as well as i386, glibc is a good example, openssl is another.
If you want an OS totally optimiz
Re:i386 (Score:2, Informative)
Or any other OS that allows you a complete source build, such as FreeBSD.
Re:i386 (Score:5, Interesting)
My campaign for IA32 Awareness continues. If only I could persuade some actual developers to use the right term.
Re:i386 (Score:2)
eric
Re:i386 (Score:2)
Re:i386 (Score:5, Informative)
The Pentium ran stuff compiled for the 386 rather slowly, and you could get significant performance improvements by using stuff targetting the 586.
The Pentium II did a much, much better job of running 386 code quickly, which is why folks mostly stopped worrying about doing processor-specific builds.
There are certain packages for which the processor type makes a significant difference. Red Hat builds multiple versions of those few -- the kernel, glibc, etc.
Furthermore, as others have pointed out, Red Hat already aligns the code for i686 by default. This is where most of the improvements come from.
If you're really curious, I have tried rebuilding most of Red Hat for a couple versions for the i686, just for the hell of it. One gets no noticeable improvements. It's really a waste of time to spend time building differently. There are a couple programs that use arch-specific assembly (SDL, for instance), but in general, very few software packages are faster when built specifically for a given processor.
Re:i386 (Score:2)
Though you do have a point that they really don't need to do that anymore. If someone wants to put Linux on a 386, they shouldn't use the newest Redhat a
Re:i386 (Score:3, Informative)
If you read the gcc manual, -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 optimizes for i686, but only uses the i386 instruction set.(Hint: there is _alot_ more to optimizing than the instruction set..)
Anyway there isn't that many speedy instruction present in i686, atleast not since gcc doesn't generate mmx or sse automatically.
An
bittorrenting now (Score:5, Insightful)
btdownloadcurses.py --max_upload_rate 350 \
--url http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/FC2-test1-binary-i3
Thank you, and goodnight!
Re:bittorrenting now (Score:2, Informative)
Seriously; if your not pegging your downstream pipe with even a slow upload, your settings must be wrong. I routinely peg my 1.5m downstream while uploading is restricted to 56k (of 128k available). Assuming of course there are enough other people in the bittorrent, and that you have opened up your firewall, and waited long enough for your information to propogate.
What a lot of people with hugely asymmetric links (like 1.5m/128k) don't realize i
fedora.org (Score:5, Funny)
Re:fedora.org (Score:5, Funny)
Already using it (Score:5, Insightful)
To me, the 2.6 kernel is really almost the ONLY reason to use FC2. Yeah, GNOME 2.5 might have some nice refinements over 2.4, but they're mere incremental improvements that for the most part, I don't even notice.
The 2.6 kernel also finally has ALSA support built-in, which is another good reason to go with FC2. I find it has *MUCH* better sound support as a result. (I could never get the stock OSS drivers working satisfactorily.)
Just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.
Re:Already using it (Score:2)
Sigh.
So, what you are saying is... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:So, what you are saying is... (Score:5, Informative)
Comparison? (Score:2)
Re:Comparison? (Score:2)
kernel-2.6.1-1.65
XFree86-4.3.0-45.0.1
Full list is almost linked right to it from the post
ftp://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux
DAMMIT... (Score:4, Interesting)
And to be honest, I don't really want to switch back.
I had a load of fun and games trying to get Fedora to share my internet connection (coming in through one ethernet card) to the Windows XP computer in the other room used by my family (on the other one). Despite following a nice tutorial I found through Google, I couldn't get it to work.
Knoppix, on the other hand, stormed in and kicked the fuck out of Fedora, and with a few mouse clicks internet connection sharing was set up. A bit of wrangling with apt-get and one command in Konstruct and I had a full KDE 3.2 desktop set up and running. I'm using it now (very slick). It's the power of Debian with the simplicity of XP, and I wouldn't think twice about setting one of these up for a friend. It's just a perfect system.
Fedora seemed bent on making everything I need to do hard as hell and putting things out of the way. Most irritating was GDM, which decided that if I pressed Ctrl-Alt-Backspace I really didn't want to kill X so I could install the NVIDIA drivers, I just wanted X to restart. It shipped with a broken kudzu meaning that hardware detection didn't work properly...gah.
Just my two pence (for Brits)
Re:DAMMIT... (Score:5, Informative)
Um this is the correct behaviour in almost every circumstance. If you want to install the binary drivers you're supposed to drop to runlevel 3, this is even documented.
The alternative is that if the X server crashes, you get thrown to a blank text screen - I'd much rather be put back at the login screen. GDM is designed this way for good reasons, you know - in fact I think most display managers do this.
Net install? (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, I small ISO that I can bootstrap the install from. That way I only download what I need.
Maybe I'm just too used to non-Red-Hat based distros but I rather prefer net installers.
Re:Net install? (Score:5, Informative)
Check the EULA carefully (Score:5, Funny)
Also, download soon. Because the all the script kiddies planning to run Fedora based password crackers on their Beawolf clusters will be clogging the mirrors. :)
Did you read this far? Are you smiling at the joke? No? Sorry.. ah.. nevermind.. I guess I better get back to work before my boss catches me on /. again.
Informative? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Check the EULA carefully (Score:4, Funny)
Then at the very end
Full EULA can be found here [codeweavers.com]
PLEASE RE-MOD PARENT (Score:3, Informative)
Screw Fedora. Run Mandrake. (Score:2, Interesting)
DVD wish list (Score:3, Interesting)
A total of 8 CDs? (Score:5, Interesting)
To me, that seems to imply that it'd be a bare-bones system, like the kernel+GNU utilities..
This is obviously not the case.. but, seriously, why the name?
Re:A total of 8 CDs? (Score:3, Informative)
"Fedora Core" distinguishes the current, core distribution from various add-ons and alternatives (Fedora Extras and Fedora Alternatives) and from software packages for older distributions (Fedora Legacy). See here [redhat.com].
(There don't seem to be any packages released yet under Fedora Extras and Fedora Alternatives, but there's no harm in planning ahead, I guess. Fedora Legacy is alive and active and has already released several updates for Red Hat 7.2/7.3/8.0.)
where is the minimal boot.iso? (Score:3, Informative)
Fedora, public sentiment, and actual impression (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay, so... I got over that (sort of...) and tried a whole bunch of different distributions, including Fedora core 1.
What I found was that I really like the fedora model, and can see that with just a little more momentum, it could become something far better that the original free redhat releases ever were.
If you are like I was, and have sworn off redhat for hacking/non-work purposes for whatever ideological reasons, I urge you to read the unofficial Fedora FAQ [artoo.net] and actually give it a try.
I have been quite impressed with Fedora and with yum for updates. Make sure to get a new yum.conf file from the unofficial faq site before you try to update your system -- redhat's patch sites are almost always flooded. Then try adding in some of the development channels and do "yum install $package1 $package2 $package3".Add yum to run from cron/as a daemon to update your system.
I just wish now that *someone* would release a version of fedora core that includes support for mp3 and various popular video formats so that it would make a usable desktop for most people out of the box. What's to stop someone from releasing ISOs of feature-overloaded-fedora that would include most of the stuff that the repositories are currently building to "fix" fedora?
But back on the topic -- Before you swear off Fedora, give it a try with an open mind.
Does ACPI power management work? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Does ACPI power management work? (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm? I thought you'd be running xp on it so that you can launch your applications...
Otherwise, leave it off... problem solved!
Cheers
Stor
Fedore UML Server/Minimal Images Available (Score:3, Informative)
AMD64 Fedora (Score:4, Informative)
Thinking seriously about buying an opteron machine...
SELinux? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Upgrading Fedora Core 1 - Fedora Core 2 (Score:2)
Re:Hurry Up... (Score:5, Informative)
On the other hand unlike the final release of Fedora Core 2, this is a test release, and *is* intended for beta testing. If you don't want to beta test, don't install it.
Re:Restraining order on RedHat (Score:5, Insightful)
This is funny enough, but what's important is that it rings true. We're moving away from RedHat, too, probably for the same reasons.
Why would I want to pay for Advanced Server (or whatever they're calling it this week)? Well, if I was running a complex app like Oracle or something, sure; it makes sense to get a highly stable, supported OS that's recommended by the app vendor.
But why would I want it for a DNS server, a webserver, an SMTP server, etc.? Other distributions (ahem, Debian, ahem, cough cough) are at least as stable, much more modular, and don't cost a cent because they're community-maintained.
"Core" my ass.
Re:Restraining order on RedHat (Score:5, Insightful)
I laugh when I hear people talking about switching to Debian. It's not like they provide better support than RHEL. Red Hat provided an excellent upgrade path from Red Hat Linux 1 all the way to the most recent releases of RHEL WS, AS, etc.
Where was the problem? If it was too much money, fine, you can't afford it, I understand. But, don't blame Red Hat for that. We all knew a long time ago that supporting hundreds of diverse projects loosely gathered together into an OS distribution was a mountain of work. No one is shocked here.
If anything, RH took the best road. They provide the business suit set with something they can pay for and they provide a high-quality free version that the community gets input on! I use Fedora every day, and it's a great system. The apt integration is perfect, the compatibility with Red Hat Linux is seemless and the software selection is unrivaled (though it tends to be slightly more conservative than Debian unstable and slightly less so than Debian stable (which always lags unstable by a year or more).
Re:Restraining order on RedHat (Score:5, Interesting)
I am very happy with fedora and am more happy then I was with RHL before Fedora. I get the same updates I used to get, only this time its less of a black box and more of a community thing (and though its still not perfect its getting better)
and its free.
I dont have to install software (like the new GNOME) from scratch or wait a year for them to release a new version.
The whole process is somthing that anyone can join, or see what is going on inside. If a certian package is removed, or if I want to add a package, it is much easier now.
Yes, Fedora is a distribution for the USERS of RHL, and most of the serious ones that dont think Redhat owed us anything, are actally very happy!
Re:Restraining order on RedHat (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm aware Red Hat didn't write linux, but even you have to admit they blaze a few trails and lead in my areas. If you don't admit it that's fine too I will not list them.
I gave Red Hat a couple of hundred RHN subscriptions, including all of my personal systems and the rest from among my employer and client base, all for doing what a Gentoo user does every time he
Oh Christ Shut up already! (Score:5, Insightful)
Red Hat still does make a quality Free distro that's updated for Free, its called Fedora. Don't like the fact that its only supported for like 9-12 months which is shorter than it used to be? Too freaking bad.
Enjoy your Debian but realize is no magic bullet either. Unless you hop on stable the day it comes out you face the same problem of having to upgrade you whole OS in a short timeframe. If you installed Woody today your going to be dropped or "burned" as you put it because the next Stable will be out soon and then the clock ticks till Woody isn't supported anymore.
Get over you angst against Red Hat. Want a good Free as in beer and Free as in GPl distro from Red Hat? Use Fedora. Want something else? Pay for it or build it yourself.
Re:What about java for browsers? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:SELinux for all (Score:2)
This is a good thing - might even get me to move from slack, at least until slack gets SELinux...
Re:Shouldn't they fix Core 1 bugs first ? (Score:3, Insightful)
ATI mobility has goofy graphics on the installer that redhat9 doesnt have and no other distro has a problem with so it's a bug in fedora's installer.
the requirement to constantly tap the caps lock ket on many compaq laptops so you have keyboard and mouse for the installer also is not apparent in any other distro (except redhat9) or the problem that the installer just fails if you dont issue the allowcddma command on startup for mos
Re:SDL_mixer (Score:5, Informative)
regards,
CB
bash-2.05b# emerge -s sdl-mixer
Searching...
[ Results for search key : sdl-mixer ]
[ Applications found : 1 ]
* media-libs/sdl-mixer
Latest version available: 1.2.5-r1
Latest version installed: 1.2.5-r1
Size of downloaded files: 914 kB
Homepage: http://www.libsdl.org/projects/SDL_mixer/index.ht
Description: Simple Direct Media Layer Mixer Library
License: GPL-2
Re:SDL_mixer (Score:3, Interesting)
yum -y install SDL_sound-devel Which would fetch everything for you. No time compiling either. I love seeing an offtopic post that is also wrong get modded up makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Re:Fedora pronunciation (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Fedora pronunciation (Score:3, Informative)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fedora