Fedora 10 Released 211
ekimd writes "Fedora 10, aka 'Cambridge,' was released today. Some of the major features include: 'wireless connection sharing enables ad hoc network sharing, better setup and use of printers through improved management tools, virtualization storage provisioning for local and remote connections now simplified, SecTool is a new security audit and intrusion detection system.' Versions of major software include: Gnome 2.24, Eclipse 3.4 and RPM 4.6. A features list can be found here."
Reader Nate2 suggests LinuxFormat's detailed look at the new release, and adds a few more details about the software it contains: the release includes "a new graphical boot-up sequence, OpenOffice.org 3, many improvements to sound support via PulseAudio and other updates."
But does it run on .... shit that does not work... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Yum does have some pros over apt but they sure aren't speed and efficiency.
Good god, like what? I haven't found *anything* yum does better than apt.
Re: (Score:2)
Good god, like what? I haven't found *anything* yum does better than apt.
Off the top of my head, it can install packages based on filenames or "provides" if you don't know the package name. It can also install a local package and resolve dependencies from repositories. apt can't do any of those things.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a debian zealot but in defense of apt I have to say that all these features that you mentioned seem pretty much useless to me.
Useless as in: I have never needed anything like that in my 8 years on various linux distros (deb, rpm, gentoo), not even once.
The only feature that seems at least theoretically useful would be the last one. I could imagine using that when testing a package that I rolled myself, but in reality you just set up a local package mirror for that which you need anyways when you get
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
One thing that they did a few fedora versions back is switch from xml based meta data to gzipped sqllite files. Sped things up immensely.
I guess some people just like to criticize whatever it is that competes with the thing they're using.
Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (Score:5, Informative)
Problem is when Fedora first jumped off everyone tried it then formed an opinion based on 5 years ago. Most of these opinions spider across slashdot by people who haven't installed fedora since F2. When i was running Fedora a simple yum update command would finish in about 3-5 seconds. I'm also using a p4/2gb.
From the yum FAQ:
How is the speed of yum compared to APT-RPM?
yum automatically checks the repository every time you perform a command, except when run in shell mode, while APT only checks it when you run 'apt-get update' manually. This causes it to appear slower than it is. If you want yum to run from cache instead of checking the repositories, run 'yum -C '. See the man page for details.
yum now uses sqlite for its back-end database by default. This results in an edge in speed over older versions of yum. Beginning with Fedora Core 4, yum contains significant improvements that make it faster and more capable than older versions.
In general to posters. If you haven't installed an OS in 5 years would you mind not commenting on it unless you state when you used it. People out there get the impression nobody fixed yum when it was fixed 7-8 versions ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair's fair, I noticed that the search heuristics improved around FC4 or FC5. I used to hate those as well, now they're fine.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I've never really understood why Yum performance is really all that make or break important. I for one spend more time using the software installed than installing it. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I don't spend all day every day installing and removing software.
If I use OpenOffice a lot and notice that it's significantly slower on one distro in particular, that would be more of a deciding factor than how long it took to install OpenOffice.
Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (Score:2)
next time I decide to upgrade my OS.
Alternatively, if you use an OS which guarantees clean upgrades, such as Debian, one of the BSDs, or IIRC Gentoo, then "upgrade" is simply a shell command you issue.
Huh? (Score:2)
My Linux boxes tend to have an uptime of over 90 days or more, depending on whether or not power is stable.
Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (Score:5, Funny)
There is been a bug in the Linux kernel that makes computers reboot every 47.9 days. This bug has been around for nearly 15 years!
I think you've misspelled "Windows NT" as "Linux".
I don't think that Linux can claim to be ready for the desktop (nor the server for that matter) until its development process is streamlined. As it is, the development priorities are set at the whims of one person.
I think you've misspelled "Windows" as "Linux".
--
Linux violates 235 Microsoft patents.
I think you've misspelled "inspires" as "violates".
Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you've misspelled "Windows NT" as "Linux".
This bug actually applies to Win 9x, rather than to NT[1]. I'm led to believe that the reason is that MS used an int as a millisecond counter in VMM[2]. At 49.7* days, the int wraps, and Windows panics.
The bug was not discovered until 1999. Reportedly, that's how long it took for someone to convince Microsoft that they actually managed to keep Windows up for 49.7 days.
* Yes, the number is 49.7, not 47.9.
[1] Windows may crash after 49.7 days [cnet.com][3]
[2] Windows crash after 49.7 days, Automatically... Do you know? [winmatrix.com]
[3] That's right: it's cited, bitches!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My Linux based email server is currently sitting at 55 days uptime. Before that, it was up for over a year without a reboot. Only reason I rebooted it 55 days ago was to physically move it from one building to another.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (Score:5, Funny)
Viva Vista!
;)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a way. There was even a Seifeild episode about it with a frogger game.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
My Linux laptop can move from one building to another without rebooting.
Now with that trivial criterion met, we can declare that it's officially the Year of Linux on the Desktop! w00t!
Re: (Score:2)
"Linux will never be ready for the desktop (or server) if you can't move it from one building to another without rebooting!"
Handcart + fully charged UPS + wifi connection = profit!
The big question is. (Score:5, Interesting)
Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?
That is the thing that makes Ubuntu so easy. You just take a check mark off the evil restricted repositories and you can download all those evil codecs that let you play video on your Linux box.
Oh and those evil closed source video drivers as well.
Re:The big question is. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well yes, if you use Totem. Seems silly that you need to use a specific player to get that functionality. Well, as long as they include another way to get those codecs I don't care.
Re:The big question is. (Score:5, Informative)
You can install the rpmfusion-nonfree repo's signing keys and update the binary blobs via yum. However RPMfusion is not included in the release by default and you'll have to do this by yourself.
AFAIK distributing "evil" codecs are against Fedora's policy so they don't do that. But that doesn't prevent anyone else from doing it.
Re:The big question is. (Score:5, Informative)
Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?
Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion [rpmfusion.org]. So you just install the rpmfusion rpm and then you get access to all the goodies. Not too sure how this is presented GUI-wise though.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion [rpmfusion.org].
Except for the package libdvdcss, which could not be included into RPM Fusion and is still sitting in Livna.
Different Audience (Score:4, Insightful)
Fedora and Ubuntu are aimed at different audiences and/or "market" segments. Ubuntu is a great "just works" distro, whereas Fedora is much nicer for tweakers.
Both have little things the other lacks, or work slightly differently in some ways.
I say use the one you prefer.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Slackware.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A distro for tweakers that ships Gnome by default? Gasp!
There's a KDE spin too and has been for the last two releases at least. Just take your pick.
Re: (Score:2)
That's probably why the KDE spins are difficult. KDE3 worked perfectly well though from my experiences using it prior to making a switch for 4.
Still use gnome on my laptop though with FC9.
Re: (Score:2)
Extremely lame. I don't have this damnable bother with Ubuntu.
Then use Ubuntu. If something as trivial as configuring a third party repo is too much work, you are going to hate Fedora.
Re: (Score:2)
For me? Not at all. I admit that I have a fondness of not doing more work than I really have too.
I have been using Linux for a long time and you have hit on one of the big problems with the mindset of many Linux users.
Why should I have to configure a third party repo? What do I gain over the way Ubuntu does it.
Why should I have to go through a lot of fiddling to get my video driver working?
Working well with a lack of effort is a good thing.
Re: (Score:2)
So one repo doesn't want to include something that could potentially get them into trouble. They reserve the right to do so.
Livna's repo is ok with providing that rpm. Just click on a link to the repo's definition rpm, and a GUI installer will popup asking you if you want to install it. Next time you run the GUI to lookup software Livna's packages will be included.
It's at least as easy as installing some unlicensed patent-encumbered piece of software on any other operating syst
Re: (Score:2)
For me? Not at all. I admit that I have a fondness of not doing more work than I really have too. I have been using Linux for a long time and you have hit on one of the big problems with the mindset of many Linux users. Why should I have to configure a third party repo? What do I gain over the way Ubuntu does it.
Flexibility. You get to choose the repo. You get to choose if you want to be running open source only stuff, or if you are happy with binary packages and codecs that Fedora does not officially support. Not a big deal for most, but still something that some care about. Realistically, how long does it take to install a repo and type "yum install kmod-nvidia"(as I did about half an hour ago) and then reboot after Yum pulls in all the required packages. Is this any worse than having to enable the restricted repositories and then select your video card?
Why should I have to go through a lot of fiddling to get my video driver working?
You don't. One of the reasons for so many distros is that different people like different ways of doing things. Ubuntu automates many things, Fedora doesn't. Ubuntu is aimed at making as much possible with as little effort as possible, Fedora isn't. If that doesn't ring your particular bell, don't use Fedora. The distro makers cater to a specific group of users, and we tend to like the way it works. Personally, I'm as much interested in how something works as I am in getting it working at all. There are plenty of choices. There is even a script called autoten available from one of the Forum users that automatically sets everything up for you with no more effort than clicking a few check boxes and a button.
Working well with a lack of effort is a good thing.
It's a matter of taste. Fedora is not the only distro. Pick one that fits.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's pretty easy, last time I did it was with Livna - click on the RPM on their website and install it (using the GUI, naturally), then the new packages can easily be found in the Add/Remove software GUI along with all the usual Fedora stuff. Piece of cake.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
RPM Fusion (Score:4, Insightful)
It's never been difficult to add Dag and Livna, but it's now even easier: http://rpmfusion.org/ [rpmfusion.org] I really liked the polish of Fedora 9, it was a huge step up from 8. Hopefully Fedora 10 continues in that direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you're running rawhide, this is almost never an issue anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
At one point, I stupidly ran an update right before heading out to a meeting. I rebooted, and no wireless (I was using madwifi from livna, I think). oops. It was my own foolishness I guess, but still...
Easy enough to fix. Reboot and run on the previous kernel. If anything, the kernel comes out first and is accidentally updated, and then the wifi or video card drivers come out a bit later. Anything from hours to days. It happens to us all from time to time.
Breaking the law is always easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but Fedora is not Red Hat.
Re: (Score:2)
Canonical almost certainly has support agreements in the US, and they got assets there (the OEM team is located there). Sounds to me they'd have a little problem escaping US jurisdiction if someone was to take a shot at them. Hopefully what they're doing is distancing themselves enough to stay out of trouble.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Fedora wouldn't care if its legal or not. They're doing it cause its not OSS.
People tend to think this is something Fedora wants to do but it isn't. They dont Want MP3 by default, they dont want closed drivers by default. You know why? they want to distribute a free OS and promote free software. Unless these technology's have gpl source code fedora doesn't care much. Just lump it into RPM fusion and be done with it. Its a perfect solution to me. Did you know on window
Re:Breaking the law is always easy (Score:5, Informative)
I believe GP was referring to the fact that in the US, DVD playback software can't be shipped on a box without a license from the DVDCCA. Thank you so much for the DMCA, Congress.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's still valid, the MP3 format as well as covered under a patent, so I know at least for a time that Red Hat would not include an MP3 player.
The compression method used in GIF images used to have the same problem. It was patented and so a freeware program couldn't (legally) use GIF images. I'm 99% sure that this patent has since expired though. The whole fiasco still left me with a bias towards PNG for lossless compression though.
Re: (Score:2)
The whole fiasco still left me with a bias towards PNG for lossless compression though.
Especially since by 2004 we had browsers that could use alpha channel transparency. Well, except the IE users, but I think they got that in IE7.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Warning: I is a n00b (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember having fun installing Fedora 9 on my PS3. I'd never used linux before (I know, I know, I'll hand in my geek card at the next meeting...) and I figured it'd be more interesting to get a distro NOT designed for the PS3 to run properly than one that was (Such as YDL).
But for those "in the know", would this distro feature any changes/improvements with regards to the PS3? Or is it still "unofficially" supported and thus will be about the same?
Re: (Score:2)
Newer packages, so yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I figured it'd be more interesting to get a distro NOT designed for the PS3 to run properly...
You get two hacker points, one for running Linux on a game console instead of a PC, and one for running a distro that's not designed for said game console.
Warning: you are three hacker points away from being disqualified for n00b status!
Re: (Score:2)
I reject your amateurish Geek ranking system if favor of the The Geek Test [innergeek.us].
32.93886% - Total Geek
They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (Score:3, Interesting)
RPM 4.6 is an RC, not a stable release. I have to say it's a somewhat bold move. RPM is the heart of the distro. It is even more important than the kernel.
As a Fedora supporter I for one welcome the move.
Now cue the RPM haters.
Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you hit it right on the head. Fedora can do this, because that's what it's for. It avoids getting trapped behind painful changes because of worries that it'll cause short term pain.
Fedora should be all about long term gain, and if RPM 4.6 is a little bit experimental, great. Let's get the bugs out in the open and sort it out.
Re: (Score:2)
Fedora (and the old free (non-enterprise) Redhat) were always about the bleeding edge. You get the newest stuff that they can cram in, and bugs aren't that uncommon.
RedHat Enterprise uses much older, much more tested code. They use Fedora for their testbed, use them to push wider adoption and testing of software that they want to put into their flagship product.
It's not a bad deal, but people who put the "newest" redhat stuff on their servers make my skin crawl. It's not really for that.
Re: (Score:2)
How do cutting edge distros compare actually?
Im using ubuntu and it seams to be a bit too stable (as in old packages) for me.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The cool thing about Fedora is that it is cutting edge innovative stuff. I use RHEL or CENTOS on servers, but on my Thinkpad, which isn't even my primary laptop, I just love tossing on each Fedora release as soon as it comes out and tweaking it until the next version comes out. It is a fun way to geek out and learn. If there are bugs or glitches, it is often challenging and fun to workout and troubleshoot. The cool part is that much of Fedora leads into RHEL releases so as a Linux consultant I not only
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, yes and yes. SELinux is good because it lets you implement the principle of least privilege in a fine-grained fashion, which is especially nice for network-facing servers. And the policies aren't that hard to understand and customize.
Re: (Score:2)
Mirrors are still unavailable (Score:3, Informative)
10:40 am Eastern
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Portland State seems to be working. I'm just about done downloading a minimal set of packages.
I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (Score:2, Redundant)
I expect this one will be better still.
(No I don't work for Red Hat.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I expect this one will be better still. (No I don't work for Red Hat.)
As a Fedora user perhaps you (and your many cohorts in the community who are reading this) can offer some input.
I used to use Red Hat and Fedora in olden times. I got to know them really well (I'm even an RHCE). But when FC2 came out it really bothered me. While FC1 was basically an evolution of Red Hat 9, FC2 was way too experimental to be an everyday business or personal OS, and it revealed what Red Hat was going to do with its free OS: turn me into a guniea pig. It was the first Fedora to sport the 2
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Try upgrading to the latest 9.04 alpha if you're not using it on a critical box. KDE4.1 has been much improved (might even be 4.2... dunno), but there are still lots of random broken packages and such.
That said, KDE4.1 is definitely the issue with Kubuntu. It's still not mature, though it is "stable".
Re: (Score:2)
If you want (in my opinion), the best, certainly one of the most configurable, KDE 4.x experience out there, try KDEmod [kdemod.ath.cx]. Currently it's at version 4.1.3, and includes some backports from the 4.2 branch as well (finally, panel auto-hiding for example). Even better, it runs on a very flexible and fast distribution [archlinux.org], that's either i686 or x86-64 optimized, has a really fast package manager, uses precompiled packages by default but makes compiling packages with custom options very trivial and is as light (or hea
Re: (Score:2)
It hasn't been called Fedora Core for quite a while. It's just Fedora now.
Xen slowly being discarded ? (Score:2)
This dom0 [fedoraproject.org] was rather important for me. I am still running FC8 for that reason. I guess xen virtualization is slowly disappearing. Kvm I presume will be the way to go eventually...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've been following the fedora-xen mailing l
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Xen as a dom0 is in fact losing favor in the Red Hat world. There are technologies being developed that will allow a KVM host to run Xen guests. It's called "xenner" http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/ and is coming along nicely, but not super stable yet.
Virtualization is important to Red Hat, and given how much of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 was focused around virtualization, there is little doubt that existing deployments on Xen won't have a migration path to what RHEL 6 offers. Red Hat hedged their
Distro comparison? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is there a web site that compares distros? I look at the release list for FC10 and I don't see much compared to how Ubuntu is, but there is a lot of techy stuff under the hood also on that list that causes me to wonder what is good "inside" of Ubuntu, versus FC10.
Re:Distro comparison? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, then that's what we mean when we say FC10 here, too! So there.
Re: (Score:2)
You can compare the softwares (and versions) distributed by each one on http://distrowatch.com/ [distrowatch.com]
Or, download the Live CD for both of them and try out :-)
Tip: if you don't want to burn a CD just to test a distro, you can write the Live CD images to a USB stick. Just look at the livecd-iso-to-disk script in Fedora's ISO.
Re: (Score:2)
http://unetbootin.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
its easy and simple to use.
Virtualbox is a possibility for trying distro's although it will not help you decide if your hardware is supported well enough to run native.
Re: (Score:2)
Fast boot (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And even then only on some, none of the newer cards work for example (and newer is from the last 1-2 years or so).
RHEL6 (Score:2)
Any word on whether Red Hat Enterprise 6 will be based on this release or Fedora 9?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
According to Red Hat's presentation at SC08 last week, Enterprise 6 will be base on Fedora 11.
2010 then? Late 2009 would be pushing it a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
... by MagPulse (316)
64210 doesn't seem like a very low user number at all any more :-o
Competitive Advantage? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why should I use this new Fedora instead of Ubuntu or OS X or FreeBSD, etc.?
What a shitty summary (par for the course, I know, I know).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Use Ubuntu if you're hoping for things to just work.
I'm not sure abotu FreeBSD. And really, on Ubuntu, I'm just passing what I've heard as the only time I tried it it failed me terribly.
Re:Competitive Advantage? (Score:5, Funny)
Use Ubuntu if you are lazy and like free beer
Use Fedora if you like free beer and Free software
Use FreeBSD if you like free beer and dont like GPL
Use OSX if you like to flash $100 bills when you pay for your beer
Re: (Score:2)
Why should I use this new Fedora instead of Ubuntu or OS X or FreeBSD, etc.?
I use it cause they're dedicated to free software. We help them, they help us. I wont go down the massive amount of new technologies and bug fixes fedora provides cause its pretty much common knowledge these days.
2+GB rpm's? (Score:2)
The new version of rpm (4.6) shipped with Fedora 10 claims that it can handle packages over 2GB now. Does anyone have packages that big?
Re:2+GB rpm's? (Score:5, Funny)
My package is at least that big.
Oh come on, someone had to say it.
Re: (Score:2)
My package is at least that big.
Oh come on, someone had to say it.
You mean your package can fit on a thumb drive?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I seriously hope nobody is shipping RPMs with more than 2 GB of executable code, but many applications ship with gigabytes worth of templates, samples, artwork, models, benchmark data sets, maps, etc. Even if you break the contents of an installation DVD into functionally distinct subpackages, you can easily end up with a dozen libraries that are a few hundred KB, a few distinct applications that are tens of megabytes each, and few GB of application data that can't logically be split any further.
Happy anniversary Fedora !! (Score:3, Interesting)
I am using Fedora from the first version on ...
I have a server, that still runs Fedora core 1:
[messner@Server messner]$ cat /etc/*-release
Fedora Core release 1 (Yarrow)
Fedora Core release 1 (Yarrow)
[messner@Server messner]$ date
Tue Nov 25 18:16:34 CET 2008
I will shut it down this month .... now it can go to rest ....
Sometimes Fedora wasn't so polished as it should be, the first versions were very problematic, documentation and community were scarce ... sometimes it was hardly usable for me, because I am not an expert.
But it got better and better with each release. Number 9 was excellent, first class ... I think number 7 was the first one, that really rocked, but No. 9 rocks ...
I am downloading number 10 now. I know it will be good. It is getting better and better with each release.
VirtualBox (Score:2)
Anyone else got a kernel oops when running the liveCD under VirtualBox?
Re:Enjoy the porn (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)