Fedora Core 2 released to Mirrors, Bittorrent 429
tom taylor writes "Fedora Core 2 has been released to mirrors, due for public consumption on Tuesday 18th May. However, you can grab it now via BitTorrent, so get it while it's fresh! It's available in both the 4 CD or DVD versions."
Great (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Great (Score:2)
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Try yellowdoglinux.com for a PPC version of Linux. Or OS-X
Fedora: By Adults, For Adults? (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're after a noisy, flashy Linux with umpteen ways to play music and videos, Fedora is not for you.
I you're after a professional piece of work that seems to have been built by adults for adults, look at Fedora.
Re:Are you a corporate shill? (Score:5, Insightful)
>>
First of all, no conflict exists between ease of use and technical merit. Deleting a file using "rm" or with a mouse get you to the same place and do the same thing.
Second, the technical community, if there is one, is no more elite than the marketing community, or the realtor community, or the barber community. The elitism in the tech community is bogus, and primarily finds expression in the arrogance many of its members express toward anyone else. It's rather like someone prancing around arguing that people who drive cars with autotmatic transmissions are trying to "leverage" a little glory from the "elite auto mechanic community".
>>...they are rightly the target of ridicule in the legitimate FOSS technocrat community
For using the same damn software that's in every other bleeding Linux distribution? Fedora drops a couple mp3 players, uses a Gnome theme that doesn't glow in the dark, and gets beat up for it. By some nonexistent "legitimate FOSS technocrat community".
>> The Redhat: Fedora Core product is for users who:
# Would prefer to use the tools prescribed for them by others or by default in their corporate environment.
Well, like I said, it's the same damn software. And, if your boss owns the hardware, your boss gets to "prescribe" the software that's on it.
# Value a shiny, flashy system initialization screen where essential details are hidden by a pretty picture.
It's not shiny or flashy. It's rather dark and blue and it just sits there and does nothing. ANd those intitialization details are not essential to a user, who won't understand them anyway. They get paid to work, not understand Linux messages.
Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)
Some googling found..
Re:Great (Score:5, Interesting)
Estimates go as low as 977 million [esu.org] people have notions of English. Or up to 1.5 billion [englishclub.com].
The average googling for "how many people speak English" gets to One in Five [englishenglish.com] in the world. So only 80% of the world has no notion of English at all...
By the way, Google Zeitgeist shows that about half of their visitors use Googles English interface. So i estimate that about half of the FC2 users will need the 4th CD.
Re:Great (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:3, Interesting)
So I still think the original estimate was pretty good.
Re:Great (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great (Score:3, Funny)
Sí, Oui, Ja, Sim, ,
Re:how does it compare to mandrake? (Score:3, Informative)
I have been a RH customer for a long time, paying for RHN and all, and have found they change their support structure entirely too often. I have RH9 and Fedora 1 on a couple boxes now only because of necessity. As always, RH is a decent "generic" version, with mixed support.
I just downloaded SuSe 9.1 Live, and liked it enough to order a "hand rolled" version. If I like that, I will order their pro version on CD.
DVD Version? (Score:4, Insightful)
I know it's a test platform but do they need to include a test copy of war and peace with EVERY release? Does anyone have a particulary clever reason (besides source disks) why it needs to be this frigging big?
This is one of the big reasons I switched to Debian, I didn't want to get sadled with a multigig *BASIC* install. No flame wars, please, but for my personal taste I can't fathom RH any more.
Re:DVD Version? (Score:5, Informative)
woody is about 7 cds for the i386 binarys alone
smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:2, Funny)
Re:smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:3, Informative)
* Windows - 1 CD
* MS Office - 2 CDs
* VS.net - 3 CDs if I remember (and you only get 1 interface and 3 languages!)
* Photoshop - 1 CD
* Quicken - 1 CD
* Exchange (? never used it)
* SQL Server 2 CDs (I think - it's been a while)
* WinZIpp - download only
And this is only a small subset of what's available on most Linux distributions.
It's not bloat because (a) you can not load it, (b) even if you load it, it doesn't slow you down unless you run it, and (c) you h
Re:DVD Version? (Score:2)
Re:DVD Version? (Score:3, Informative)
It is possible that other distros have similar things too, but only debian talks about it on frontpage.
I've done several debian installs. None of them used official cds. Only netinstall or boot floppies.
Re:DVD Version? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:DVD Version? (Score:2, Interesting)
The same applies to Fedora.
Re:DVD Version? (Score:2, Interesting)
Even with all the different languages, three CDs should be fine.
Re:DVD Version? (Score:3, Informative)
oh don't be silly (Score:4, Informative)
The "everything" install is considerably smaller than full Debian, which is amazingly (in a good way) comprehensive.
As you well know, your DOS 3.3 floppy had no applications and barely any useful tools. You can do better than that these days with a single (or, okay, probably two) floppy distro with blackbox.
Which you could *make* using Fedora, if you wanted.
Re:oh don't be silly (Score:5, Funny)
DOS 3.3 had Edlin!
And if you subscribe to the theory that the simpler something is to use, the less functionality it had... Well Edlin was the most usefull editor EVER!!!
You kids and your fancy electrons!
Re:oh don't be silly (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, I helped a blind woman get set up with Linux last year, and she uses ed exclusively -- her braille terminal is only one line, so something like vi is pointless overhead.
(PS: busybox, not blackbox, of course. My earlier post was clearly before I had coffee.)
Re:DVD Version? (Score:3)
Not my version. I scanned in each page at 1200 dpi and saved them as tiff files. Now I pine for the day when Apple releases the iRead version of the iPod, or at least for the day when I realize my brain is 95% harvati cheese.
Re:DVD Version? (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps that extra 625KB could be used to store a sense of humor :)
I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why not put it on a P2P network like eDonkey? People will probably have other downloads moving at the same time, so the particular file will have much more sources for a much longer period of time than with Bittorrent.
Really, Bittorrent seems like a poor solution to a problem better solved by real P2P software.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing with bittorrent is that you can get a small seed from an official source and be more assured that the content you are downloading is, in fact, what you want and not a trojan with the same name that turned up on some P2P network search. MD5 sums can help this, but it means in the event of an incorrect download, you've wasted your time and bandwidth. BitTorrent provides a distribution method with more verifiable authenticity before downloading than most P2P networks, and that is very valuable for this application.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2)
Doesn't the tracker host have a copy of the file though ?, if there is always one complete copy of it then there is no problem. As for leaving
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2)
no you can't, you can only piss people off by making things awkward.
how can you stop all of these...
-killing the client
-uninstalling the client
-blocking the client with firewall
-going offline
-turning off the computer
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2)
Uh No! (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know about you, but I actually like being able to download the entire set of ISOs in under 12 hours, rather than waiting the required week for my downloads to finish like on other P2P networks.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Insightful)
And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file
Yup, that's right folks. The 400+ seeds you often see for hours on newly-released anime digisubs are ALL people recruited by the fansubbing groups. NONE are just regular downloaders who leave their clients open. Not one. Yes, this means that fansubbing groups must be in excess of a couple thousand people each.
Get a clue. Its regular behavior to leave a BT client open for at least an hour afterwards. Not only that, but you don't have to have a complete copy of the file to upload. BT clients exchange bits of the file, so you're uploading while you're downloading, which saves on the bandwidth provided by the clients used to "officially" seed a file. Despite what you say, in practice, BT works quite well - people are willing to be altruistic because the protocol rewards them for it.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:3, Funny)
just a nitpick - that's not altruism.
how does this reward work? ATM I'm downloading at 4KiB/s and up at 30KiB/s, generally I upload twice as much as I download. where's my "reward"?
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Informative)
Most cable modems use a shared pool of resources for incoming and outgoing data and are set to give preference to outgoing packets. If you're running at the maximum upstream bandwidth, your cable modem spends all of its time dealing with those packets and drops incoming data (which severly limits your incoming bandwidth). So, the "tc qdisc" command keeps multiple BT clients from hogging all of my cable modem's resources.
[1] I use `tc qdisc add dev eth0 root tbf rate 200kbit latency 50ms burst 1540`, which I got off of some webpage, don't remember which one now. It works fairly well, I just turn it off (run the command again, with "del" instead of "add") when I need to send data to another computer on my home network.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:3, Informative)
Other BT clients will only send to you at a very slow rate if they cannot connect back to you to confirm you're sharing.
The reward you get for sharing is that your download will be like 50 times faster.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
Because of the decentralised way that torrents work, it would be useless to attempt the same with them. A torrent is available for the duration that one person holds a tracker file open. I love the totrent concept because it means that as well as "flash mod" assistance in getting a file quickly, you are only ever sharing 1 file at a time, and the worst the *AA coul
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:4, Insightful)
And even once the initial flood of demand has been satisfied, it scales at least as well as downloading via a web or ftp site -- and much better if two or more people are downloading. FC is popular enough that it will probably have at least two people downloading (probably many more) it at any given time until FC3 comes out.
You're wrong. People DO leave their BT clients open longer than needed to download the file. Some people do have extra bandwidth to spare, and some will leave it open just because they saw it was going to take 4 hours to download, so they went to bed and didn't come back for 10 hours.And even if they don't, it still works, because they were uploading while they were downloading.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2, Informative)
I did when downloading FC1. Actually I had forgotten it was running and didn't terminate it until a few days later asked by a system administrator where this BT traffic was comming from. I think their strategy sounds good. The first few days a lot of people is going to download it, so bittorrent is a good choice. And by waiting a few days before opening the HTTP/FTP servers for the public, they get more people using bittorrent
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2)
Well, exactly. That's not what it's good for. It's good for initial releases just like this.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:2)
Indeed you haven't understood bittorrent ;p (Score:5, Informative)
Think of this as a peer2peer accelerated download server, not a peer2peer network.
try giving this a look:
http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/introduc
This scalability is the primary reason that mandrake and blizzard is using BT, chances are this why fedora is using it too.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, you're also relying on the fact that a lot people aren't going to be sitting at their computer waiting to turn off bittorrent the instant the download is complete.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's the whole point! After a few days, when everyone already has it, getting the ISO's the conventional way from the mirrors is no problems, but when the ISO's are first out, BT works great.
And a lot of people (like me) do leave their Torrents run for a while. I throttle the upload (--max_upload_rate) so it doesn't hurt my interactivity much at all and let is run as long as possible, usually several days. I get a good feeling from being altruistic, and I bet I'm not that rare.
Have you actually tried BT, or just read about it and decided it's not worthwhile? I'm amazed each time I use it. It often starts slow (right now it says it will take 1426 hours to download!) but then it really picks up (I'll be surprised if it takes more than 3 hours, probably less). It's always seemed faster than a straight download, and I'm giving back while getting my "fix". It's a win all around, IMO.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
Bittorrent seems like an odd way to distribute files for any extended length of time. It wholly depends on how many people are downloading it at any specific moment, so when you come back maybe 3 days later, the download speeds drop to a trickle because you're the only one downloading the file now.
Your observations fly in the face of empirical evidence, which has clearly shown that BitTorrent is in fact the best way to distribute FC2.
Just because you can't understand it doesn't mean it won't work.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:4, Insightful)
When I downloaded fc2test3, I got it in just over an hour, but I left the BT client running for another 12 hours, and the stats show that it uploaded almost 10x as much as it downloaded.
Nothing is stopping you, or anyone else, from putting it on any P2P network you like. Bittorrent was designed to solve the problem of distributing files that are in high demand. It does this better than most other P2P software, so I'd conclude that Bittorrent is an excellent solution.Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Informative)
1. About 20% of people upload at least as much as they download. Which isn't a staggering number (I expected a lot higher), but that's still a reasonable number of people.
2. eDonkey - don't know about you, but I get about 24kbit/s on eDonkey. On BitTorrent, average bandwidth available per user comes out at around 200kbit/s, although I've seen up to 8mbit/s on high-demand torrents.
Oh, and there's another interesting paper at http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/pam200
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:3, Interesting)
And yet... it works anyway.
View it another way: I want to release my new Linux distribution (ChaosDiscordLinux 12.0). I've got my own site t
I don't... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've got my bittorrent client (Azureus) running 24x7 but only sharing torrents that need seeders. I stop seeding when there is a seed for every 4 peers (as long as I've upped 50%). When the seed/peer ratio goes down I have Azureus auto start the torrent and continue uploading. This way I give my bandwidth to those torrents that need it most.
I also leave my computer on at night and since I'm on broadband with no cap I keep it uploading stuff. Hey, I'm paying for always on so I may as well use it, plus I'm not saturating the local loop during the day and pissing off other people.
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:3, Informative)
Were it not for bittorrent, I'd be getting 0 B/s -- because it wouldn't be available at all until they loaded up all the mirrors. And once they did, I'd get about 20 B/s, as they'd all be massively overloa
Re:I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Interesting)
Granted, I have more bandwidth available to me than you do (work doesn't do much on the weekend, so I've got the full big pipe to myself) but it seems to be doing awfully well.
You may want to cap BitTorrent's upstream bandwidth to 75% of your upstream bandwidth. For example, if your upstream bandwidth is 128 kilobits/s, cap BT's uploads at 96 Kb/s. The caps put on cable modems are very unfriendly when you actually hit them -- by hitting your upstream bandwidth, you'll typically slow down your downloads to a similar rate. So rather than uploading 128 Kb/s and downloading 768 Kb/s, you'll get 128 Kb/s in both directions. But if you slow your uploads to 96 Kb/s, your downloads can get the full speed of 768 Kb/s. It's kind of wierd, but it's the way the caps work.
I don't have any experience with DSL -- but it wouldn't surprise me if it works the same way.
Bollocks... (Score:2)
Remember, download rate is dependant on your upload rate so if you're only upping at 1k/s you won't be downloading that fast, other peers play tit-for-tat and choke you (don't honour your requests) if you upload blocks too slowly.
The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:5, Informative)
Use the official torrent when it appears on the tracker:
http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/
Re:The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:2)
And yes, I'm aware that Bittorrent hashes the downloaded blocks, but that wouldn't prevent someone from sending hacked images and along with the original MD5SUM file, hoping people wouldn't bother checking the images.
Re:The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:2)
Yum (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yum (Score:2)
Too late (Score:2)
Depends on your configuration (Score:3, Informative)
Apparently there are some systems that yum simply can't handle because it has to update the system while it is "online" (e.g. LVM). So it looks like the answer is "it depends on your set up".
See Seth Videl's post [advogato.org] about it. My advice is to wait and see what the pitfalls are since there *will* be gotchas.
...hmm. advogato's being a bit strange today so let me post a quote:
Apparently not recommended on fedora-list (Score:5, Informative)
For FC1 -> FC2 upgrading is NOT recommended using apt, yum or any other depsolver. Anaconda has a fair bit of magic to fix things for you. Most things are manually solvable but if you're using LVM "it has a high chance of blowing up spectacularly" according to the anaconda developers - don't bother unless you like blowing up systems :)
In any case upgrading with anaconda is the recommended way.
So it looks like they recommend getting the install disks and upgrading through the installer.
What about PPC? (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a way to save time and disks (Score:4, Interesting)
where to get bit-torrent RPM? (Score:3)
Unfortunately, when I followed the story's link to bit torrent, and then looked for a bit torrent RPM for to use on my Fedora system, I learned that ... there doesn't seem to be such an RPM available.
I guess I'll be downloading this Fedora update in the old-fashioned way.
NVIDIA (Score:4, Informative)
That's all well and good for those of us that know how to do a recompile, but for Joe User it could be a bit of a hang-up.
Re:NVIDIA (Score:5, Informative)
It's great to see x86_64 Linux on equal footing with 32-bit x86 Linux. If you've been waiting for an excuse to switch over to AMD64, now's the time.
Thanks, Fedora developers! (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks again!
Please read before using above torrent (Score:5, Informative)
Please read the following [livna.org] before using an unofficial torrent to download FC2. Apparently, the official release of FC2 is not until Tuesday, and what you are downloading may or may not be the real FC2 release (it may be a Rawhide snapshot, or a trojaned distribution, for example). You can verify the signature on the MD5SUM file to check it, of course, but you'd have to waste your time and bandwidth downloading it first.
So the real question is........ (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So the real question is........ (Score:5, Informative)
check (Score:4, Informative)
Blazzing (Score:3, Funny)
Est finish time: 2443:08:30.
Woowoo!
CAREFUL IF YOU DUAL-BOOT FC2 and XP! (Score:4, Informative)
In soviet russia, Linux disables your Windows installation.
SELinux (Score:4, Informative)
New, working torrent (Score:5, Informative)
Now, for all of the snotty people who were poo-pooing BitTorrent because their downloads weren't going a million megs a second, let me explain precisely why:
YOU WEREN'T INVITED
Y'see, the torrent that got posted to Slashdot was never intended for widespread consumption. The tracker was hosted on an individual's home DSL via a java client and simply wasn't expected to handle the load of widespread usage. Once the hordes of gimmie gimmie kiddies showed up it fell right over. Repeatedly. No wonder you couldn't get a decent transfer rate and your connections were timing out. Then, to make matters worse, half of the people who started connecting in the first big wave decided to disconnect and throw their downloads in the trash. Boy, that's going to help a torrent with one seed just a whole bunch. And again, let's remind ourselves: YOU WEREN'T INVITED.
So now there's a new tracker and faster seeds and things are moving along nicely. And now you're invited. I'm sure you won't disappoint us by disconnecting your client the instant your download is done.
http://kuix.de/fedora/
Thank you for your patience and cooperation.
FAST MIRROR of bittorrent cd iso images (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is this the final release or test3? (Score:5, Informative)
this is the final
Re:Is this the final release or test3? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is this the final release or test3? (Score:2)
Re:Is this the final release or test3? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is this the final release or test3? (Score:2)
The core was supposed to be released for mirrors on the morning of May 14th, then the open release will be announced on May 18th. Presumably there should be sufficient mirrors to manage to the load by then.
Re:Does anyone ever stick with their current insta (Score:2, Insightful)
I can keep going if you like.
there are plenty of reasons to upgrade your operating system and/or kernel.
Why not? (Score:2)
Re:Instead of upgrading your Fedora... (Score:2, Informative)
emerge -Du world is the way to be. the U implies upgradeonly, when really a bad patch could have been applied. -u keeps you at the latest and greatest version. U can very easily break your system, even if you are Johnny Careful.
Troll, but I'll take the bait... (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I am a devout Gentoo convert and wouldn't use anything else now, but for someone coming from the graphical handholding of Fedora, the Gentoo install is like walking blind. And heaven help you if you didn't print off the install manual - better hope those Fedora disks are still lying around for you to get your internet connection back after attempt #1.
Sure to be bitchslapped by meta-mods... (Score:2)
Re:More torrents needed (Score:2)
To each point in the faq:
- Be patient, wait for others. Thats the point of my post.
- Make sure torrent is live. Check - downloading is occuring.
- Limiting upload rate can help. Check - its limited.
- Allow outgoing connections. Check - its wide-open, and obviously working, since I mentioned people downloading from me.
- Don't use NAT. Check - not using NAT.
- Firewall has openings for all ports needed.
So whats your brilliant idea, moron.
Re:More torrents needed (Score:2)
Thanky for thisy tipsy, my Swedishy friendy. Borky bork.
Re:The question (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Too bad BitTorrent doesn't run on Fedora Core 1 (Score:3, Informative)
So, the bittorrent rpm that's installed on my FC1 system is just a figment of my imagination? The very bittorrent install that's currently downloading FC2? Drat!
Re:For the beta testers (FC2 Test3) (Score:3, Informative)
I used yum as installed, unmodified, with the original RedHat/Fedora config:
[development]
name=Fedora Core $releasever - Development Tree
baseurl=http://download.fedora.redhat.com/p u b/fedo ra/linux/core/development/$basearch/
This, when you run 'yum -y update', replaces this config with:
[base]
name=Fedora Core $releasever - $basearch - Base
baseurl=http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu b/fedo ra/linux/core/$releasever/$basearch/os/
[updates-released]
name=Fedora Core $releasever - $basearch - Released Updates
b
Re:This is a hoax (Score:4, Interesting)
You can't check the md5sums of the ISOs until the entire bittorrent download is complete. Bittorrent makes no guarantee that all of ISO 1 is finished downloading before you start getting ISO 2. It's common for bittorrent to go back and patch "holes" in files near the end of the download - and any gap in the file will mess up your md5sum check.
Re:WARNING: This key is not certified with a trust (Score:4, Informative)
This indicates that the MD5SUM has been verified correctly with the indicated key
This indicates that gpg can't find a chain of signatures from either your key or from a key marked as 'trusted' in the trust database to this particular key. If you've never signed anyone else's key, or you're never maintained the trust database in gpg, you can pretty well expect to get this message on any file you verify. It's pretty well meaningless unless you've taken steps to use the 'web of trust' features in pgp/gpg. Unless you're really paranoid, I wouldn't worry about the validity of the signature
Re:Bad MD5Sums here... (awe suck!) (Score:3, Informative)
The matching by itself only means the latter - that the files you received aren't corrupted.
What gives some confidence that the files are from Fedora is the fact that the MD5SUM file is digitally signed by Fedora's signing key. Once you've installed the Fedora Project's key into
Re:Why isn't this on fedora.redhat.com (Score:3, Informative)
Well, the schedule states that:
14 May Release to mirrors (morning)
18 May Release open, announced
So it's been released to mirrors by now, but the official release is not until tomorrow.
The four days are to make sure that every mirror is synchronized so everyone opens up at the same time which will, hopefully, prevent 'em from getting swarmed. This