Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


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

Fedora Core 2 released to Mirrors, Bittorrent 429

Posted by CmdrTaco from the stuff-to-snag dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fedora Core 2 released to Mirrors, Bittorrent More

Fedora Core 2 released to Mirrors, Bittorrent

Comments Filter:

  • Great (Score:5, Informative)

    by arvindn ( 542080 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:37AM (#9166791) Homepage Journal
    Despite all recent negative publicity, Fedora is a great distro for the hobbyist desktop. I've been running FC1 since its release without any problems. I wish they'd stuck to 3 CDs though. IIRC, the 4th CD consists of lots of languages (and nothing else) so most people can skip it. Kernel 2.6, gnome 2.6, kde 3.2... can't wait.
    • Is there a PPC version?

      • Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Pharmboy ( 216950 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:36PM (#9169050) Journal
        No PPC version. Fedora only supports the various i386 flavours. Redhat used to support Alpha and Sparc, but I think they dropped everything but i386/i64/amd64 a few versions back.

        Try yellowdoglinux.com for a PPC version of Linux. Or OS-X ;)

    • Fedora: By Adults, For Adults? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by reallocate ( 142797 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @01:26PM (#9167828)
      I've been running a Test3 that was updated just after their 7 May freeze. Pretty slick.

      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.

  • DVD Version? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TheLoneCabbage ( 323135 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:37AM (#9166792) Homepage
    You know in my day DOS3.3 still fit on one 1.44 floppy!

    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)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:40AM (#9166798)
      debian has a dvd version
      woody is about 7 cds for the i386 binarys alone

      • smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:2, Interesting)

        by big_groo ( 237634 )
        And people talk about windows bloat...*sheesh*
        • Check out the future Longhorn :) I bet you will get an entire new understanding of the "bloat" concept... And don't tell me you'd rather download emacs, openoffice, kde (or gnome) and everything else, just because you want it all on one cd... (BTW, checkout Slackware 9.1, it's very nice distro on one cd...)
        • Yeah If windows came with every application under the sun it would be 4 cds too, Remember linux can fit on a 16kb flash card, but since fedora wants to package every known linux application with their release, they have huge install cds..

          • Re:smack! -1 Flamebait (Score:3, Informative)

            by johnnyb ( 4816 )
            Actually, if you take a look at it:

            * 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
      • Everyone else is jumping off the bridge, I might as well too! Good point!

      • Re:DVD Version? (Score:3, Informative)

        by tokul ( 682258 )
        you can start with 35-200 Mb version and get other packages from local mirrors.

        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:2, Interesting)

      by fostware ( 551290 )
      Yeah, it can't be that big... Knoppix is one CD has 2.4 and 2.6 kernel, OpenOffice, and a veritable truckload of tools.
      Even with all the different languages, three CDs should be fine.

    • oh don't be silly (Score:4, Informative)

      by mattdm ( 1931 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:47AM (#9166844) Homepage
      A minimal install of FC2 will be 500-something MB.

      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)

        by TheLoneCabbage ( 323135 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:54AM (#9166901) Homepage
        Take that back!

        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)

          by mattdm ( 1931 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @01:30PM (#9167848) Homepage
          Of course, Fedora has ed, which blows edlin out of the line-oriented-editor water.

          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.)

  • I never understood the Bittorrent thing... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Noose For A Neck ( 610324 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:41AM (#9166809)
    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. And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.

    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)

      by Junta ( 36770 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:50AM (#9166864)
      But it scales at worst case no worse than http/ftp so long as the hosting providers normally providing http/ftp allocate equal resources to serving bittorrents. When you are the only user of an http/ftp site, you get satisfactory speeds, so bittorrent would do fine for that scenario. Times like this where http/ftp services would crumble under the load, bittorrent offloads the work effectively and yields better download speeds than http/ftp do when there is only one client.

      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.
    • 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. And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.

      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

    • Uh No! (Score:5, Informative)

      by leerpm ( 570963 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:55AM (#9166908)
      Unlike traditional P2P, Bittorrent was designed especially for purposes like this: Getting large files out to a lot of a people in a relatively short time. Mirrors simply do not scale for this, and those traditional P2P networks like eDonkey are way too slow for downloading something as large as FC.

      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)

      by RickHunter ( 103108 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @11:01AM (#9166941)

      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.

      • >people are willing to be altruistic because the protocol rewards them for it.

        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)

          by klevin ( 11545 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:42PM (#9167543) Homepage Journal
          I've noticed that my download speed can vary rather a bit. It usually starts out quite slow and then kicks up several notches after a while. Also, you can start the official client from the command line with the "--max_upload_rate" argument. I generally set mine to "--max_upload_rate 5". I also use the "tc qdisc" command to limit the maximum outgoing bandwidth to just below my cable modem's upload limit [1].

          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.
    • Your right, eDonkey and the other sharing tools make ALL the files available in your share folder available whenever you have eDonkey running.

      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
    • Bittorrent seems like an odd way to distribute files for any extended length of time.
      Perhaps, but it's an awesome way to distribute them when six gazillion people want something large the moment it comes out. FC2 definately falls into this category right now.

      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.

      And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.
      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.

    • And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file

      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
    • Bittorrent seems like an odd way to distribute files for any extended length of time.

      Well, exactly. That's not what it's good for. It's good for initial releases just like this.
    • The thing is, the model works if you make people upload what they download or they get banned from that particular site/tracker. If you threaten to stop the free lunch, suddenly everyone is altruistic.

    • Indeed you haven't understood bittorrent ;p (Score:5, Informative)

      by dmouritsendk ( 321667 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @11:18AM (#9167056)
      The idea is that the company distributes the torrent have set up a seeder. This way, if nobody besides your are downloading, you'll still get good download rates because you are the only one accessing the primary seeder. If the primary seeder gets overloaded, it wont matter much since your btclient will download from one of the many other client downloading the file.

      Think of this as a peer2peer accelerated download server, not a peer2peer network.

      try giving this a look:
      http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/introduct ion.htm l

      This scalability is the primary reason that mandrake and blizzard is using BT, chances are this why fedora is using it too.
    • And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.

      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)

      by dheltzel ( 558802 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:02PM (#9167284)
      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. And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.

      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)

      by noda132 ( 531521 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:47PM (#9167576) Homepage

      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)

      by Eric Smith ( 4379 ) * on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:48PM (#9167584) Homepage Journal
      And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file
      Maybe you don't, but that doesn't mean that nobody does.

      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.

      Why not put it on a P2P network like eDonkey?
      Nothing is stopping you, or anyone else, from putting it on any P2P network you like.
      Really, Bittorrent seems like a poor solution to a problem better solved by real P2P software.
      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)

      by Xugumad ( 39311 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:37PM (#9168191)
      Having just written a paper on BitTorrent (which should be presented at PGNET 2004 [livjm.ac.uk] if anyone cares), a couple of points:

      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/pam2004 /papers/148.pdf [cam.ac.uk] that covers things like user-count dropoff.

    • 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. And nobody leaves their BT clients open longer than it takes to download a file - I'm sorry, but relying on people's altruistic behavior is plain stupid.

      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

  • The OFFICIAL torrent (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:42AM (#9166815)
    Don't download a potentially hacked version of FC2 from unknown sources identified by ip numbers only.

    Use the official torrent when it appears on the tracker:

    http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/

  • Yum (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Moth7 ( 699815 ) <<mike.brownbill> <at> <gmail.com>> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:47AM (#9166848) Journal
    Anyone know if it's possible to upgrade through Yum repositories? I don't know about you, but after the 3 CDs of Core 1, I'm a bit annoyed at the extra 6 for Core 2 :-\
    • Sounds like Debian would please you.
      • Gentoo already did. I'm asking for the benefit of my little brother's box - he likes the look and feel of Fedora and I'm not going to try a source-distro on his ancient i586 ;)

    • 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:

      Wrote up some not-yet-finished notes on how to yum update from FC1 to FC2 with relative ease. I'll post a link here when I'm happy. It'

    • Apparently not recommended on fedora-list (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:25PM (#9167447)
      Quoted from fedora-list [redhat.com]:

      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)

    by imidazole2 ( 776413 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @10:50AM (#9166866) Homepage Journal
    Did they release Core2 For the PPC?

  • Here's a way to save time and disks (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Pacifix ( 465793 ) <zorp@@@zorpy...com> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @11:10AM (#9167000)
    FedoraNews.org has a great tip on installing the isos over NFS [fedoranews.org] . This way you can save yourself a few blank CDs and the actual installation takes no time at all.

  • where to get bit-torrent RPM? (Score:3)

    by dankelley ( 573611 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @11:14AM (#9167037)
    I am running Fedora Core 2 Test 3, so I figured it might make sense to upgrade to the official release. (BTW: FC2T3 is pretty well-constructed, so I'm guessing FC2official will be fine.) For fun, I decided to try Bit Torrent.

    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)

    by hawkeyeMI ( 412577 ) <brock&brocktice,com> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @11:23AM (#9167092) Homepage
    Be warned! If you use the NVIDIA binary drivers, they didn't work with FC2-test3 due to the use of the 4k stack option in the kernel. Unless that's changed in the final (I doubt it) you will have to recompile the kernel to use the NVIDIA drivers.

    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)

      by Brian Stretch ( 5304 ) * on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:16PM (#9168085)
      FWIW, 64-bit Fedora doesn't require a kernel recompile to use the nVidia closed-source drivers, but you do need the driver patch from minion.de [minion.de]. You'll also need to add "alias char-major-195 nvidia" to /etc/modprobe.conf, or modprobe nvidia manually. Don't forget to make the usual changes to /etc/X11/xorg.conf. Anyhow, I've been running 64-bit UT2004 under FC2 Test 3 for a while now and it works great, after getting the beta version mentioned here [icculus.org] (hopefully there will be an official UT2004 upgrade soon?).

      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)

    by danpbrowning ( 149453 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:05PM (#9167305)
    I just want to express my gratitude to the Fedora developers and community for releasing a well-packaged operating system. I upgraded from Fedora Core 2 - Test 3 to the official release via yum, and it has been working great. Very stable, fast, and featureful.

    Thanks again!

  • Please read before using above torrent (Score:5, Informative)

    by YellowBook ( 58311 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:33PM (#9167494) Homepage

    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)

    by rsax ( 603351 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @12:39PM (#9167524)
    Has anyone actually verified that these ISOs are legit by using the Fedora GPG key [redhat.com]?

  • check (Score:4, Informative)

    by oKilgorEo ( 579274 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:00PM (#9168903)
    not sure if i'm missing something here but it looks to check out
    SlavaSoft Optimizing Checksum Utility - fsum 2.5
    Implemented using SlavaSoft QuickHash Library <www.slavasoft.com>
    Copyright (C) SlavaSoft Inc. 1999-2003. All rights reserved.

    OK MD5 FC2-i386-disc1.iso
    OK MD5 FC2-i386-disc2.iso
    OK MD5 FC2-i386-disc3.iso
    OK MD5 FC2-i386-disc4.iso
    OK MD5 FC2-i386-rescuecd.iso

  • Blazzing (Score:3, Funny)

    by houseofmore ( 313324 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:46PM (#9169124) Homepage
    So sitting on the back of our office T1 and getting 79 bytes a second.

    Est finish time: 2443:08:30.

    Woowoo!

  • CAREFUL IF YOU DUAL-BOOT FC2 and XP! (Score:4, Informative)

    by cpu_fusion ( 705735 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @06:27PM (#9169335)
    Some users of FC2-test3 discovered that, unlike FC1, it will render your coexisting Windows XP partitions unbootable. This may possibly be limited to certain hardware configurations, but it's hard to say with no official word from the Fedora team on a fix for this, despite it having been in bugzilla since at least the test 2 release.

    In soviet russia, Linux disables your Windows installation.

  • SELinux (Score:4, Informative)

    by daserver ( 524964 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @08:09PM (#9169761) Homepage
    Can't wait to download and test SELinux, which should work out of the box. It's disabled by default, but you should be able to enable it by adding add "selinux" to the install line when installing. More information: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/selinux/

  • New, working torrent (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 17, 2004 @01:02AM (#9170859)
    First of all, to correct some of the absurd rumor and inuendo running around, yes, these files are genuine and they match checksums signed by the fedora@redhat.com GPG key. So if you can't trust that you can't trust the distributor in general....

    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)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 17, 2004 @08:52AM (#9172347)
    ftp://ftp.gaminguk.net/Mirrors/fedora_FC2_bittorre nt_cd_iso/ [gaminguk.net]

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close