Fedora 11 Is Now Available 195
rexx mainframe writes "Fedora 11 is now available on BitTorrent. Fedora 11 offers ext4, a 20-second startup, and the latest GNOME, KDE and XFCE releases. Firefox 3.5 and Thunderbird 3's latest pre-releases are available as well. Fedora 11 features Presto, a yum plugin that reduces bandwidth consumption drastically by downloading only binary differences between updates. It also features Openchange for interoperability with Microsoft Exchange. There are new security enhancements, improved and upgraded development tools, and cutting-edge features in areas such as virtualization."
It's soo cutting edge (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It's soo cutting edge (Score:5, Funny)
and this is the reason why I use it on my private laptop: I want to know what will hit my servers with Debian stable in 4 years :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I hurt myself trying to install it.
...so now it's bleeding edge?
Re: (Score:2)
The preview is a crash monkey. noPulseaudio will not play nice with VLC, mplayer or the scrototem. I can't use the ATI Radeon drivers. I'll put up with it as I will not go back to ubuntu without them restoring long term features. I'll run win7 for 3D games.
Ho ho. (Score:4, Interesting)
The release announcement makes we wonder, though. [redhat.com]
Re:Ho ho. (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what virtualization is for. I always install a new OS in a VM first. This time around, doing this led me to switching a couple of servers from Fedora to Ubuntu Server.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I know, I know, it's time for an upgrade. You tell my wallet that.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Throw more RAM in. It's so cheap these days, I've maxed out the RAM on all of my desktop machines.
You don't need it to be terribly fast if you just want to evaluate.
Re:Ho ho. (Score:5, Funny)
Fedora 11 has been out for two hours. You've already downloaded it, evaluated it, and switched some of your servers to a different distribution?
You work faster than anyone I've ever met. I am humbled by your awesome ability.
Re: (Score:2)
why is parent modded "funny?" He's making a legit point. To say, after it being available for 2 hours, that you evaluated the new version and uninstalled it and replaced it with Ubuntu is beyond silly. Hell, 2 hours from now I won't even be finished downloading it, much less evaluating it - and I have a decent pipe I'm pulling from.
Re: (Score:2)
2 hours from now I won't even be finished downloading it, much less evaluating it - and I have a decent pipe I'm pulling from.
How do you define "decent pipe"?
A single 700MB ISO should take less than 2 minutes on 100Mbps fiber. Usually, it takes a bit longer than that, since the server may not allocate that much bandwidth to a single download, or there is likely to be a bottleneck somewhere else on the route. Still, I get a typical distro ISO in less than 5 minutes - equivalent to about a 20Mbps link. If it's taking 2 hours, there is something wrong - that's only 100kbps throughput.
Re: (Score:2)
Some even longer from when it was alpha. If you didn't mind a Gig of downloads every week ... and a big chance that stuff breaks horribly (my colleague had to switch from kde to gnome with elinks and mutt to be able to work) :)
I've evaluated pre-release version (Score:2)
Ultimately, couldn't see why I'd stick with Fedora anymore. Most of my servers run CentOS (which is a humongous pain in the ass), the new Ubuntu servers are for development only. If Ubuntu does well there, CentOS may have to give way, too.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How are we supposed to evaluate your statements if you don't say HOW running distro A is a pain in the ass, and how distro B fixed it. From the fact that you don't even try to explain this I think we're left with the obvious conclusion: distro A doesn't meet your requirement of being distro B.
Re: (Score:2)
Just for contex
Gimme! (Score:2)
My Awesomeness is soo great that Not only have I installed it; evaluated it and sent out my reviews to various magazines; I have also configured it to make me coffee and raise my kids.
I need that perl script on my desk NOW! Hang on - if it raises kids, it's probably in Lisp.
Re: (Score:2)
I need that perl script on my desk NOW! Hang on - if it raises kids, it's probably in Lisp.
They call come out with big bushy beards :/
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If you want a RedHat-like OS on a server why not install CentOS?
Re: (Score:2)
Madness?
THIS IS FEDORAAAAAA!
*kicks you into a hole*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Fedora is only supported for 18 months or so, do you want to reinstall your server in 18 months time ?
To reinstall a server is silly unless you are performing a disaster recovery. In a commercial environment it is almost impossible to get some firms to approve of an update never mind an upgrade. I know of firms who are still running Redhat 2.1 which is now unsupported even though we have been hounding them about this for the last two years.
Re: (Score:2)
For better hardware support of course.
The version of the kernel running on CentOS is practically ancient at any given point more than six months after release.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you not aware that Redhat backport drivers to the RHEL kernels while keeping the kernel major and minor version numbers the same?
Centos kernels are practically the same as RHEL kernels.
Redhat released RHEL 4.8 last month and Centos 4.8 is due real soon now. Their ancient 2.6.9 kernel has drivers to support all modern *server* hardware from major vendors. (probably not notebooks, webcams, scanners and other desktop doodads.)
Re: (Score:2)
Ubuntu and Fedora are desktop OS's. Not that they can't run as servers, just why would you.
Ubuntu Server Edition [ubuntu.com] would like to have a word with you.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would you use Ubuntu Server? Why not just use Debian? CentOS rocks because it gives you a great alternative to an OS you have to pay for. Ubuntu Server gives a free version of a free OS?? Debian is rock solid and has been forever, from what I just read. I can see being a fanboy for Ubuntu because you like brown but what advantages does it bring to the server side?
Re: (Score:2)
The main thing as far as I can tell (besides from having a few proprietary drivers built in) is that ubuntu server has newer versions of programs than debian stable does (but is still "stable"). If you need the latest version of mysql or php for something, for example, you might consider ubuntu server over compiling it yourself. But server software like that doesn't change as rapidly as desktop stuff, so it's not much of an advantage. Hence why very few people use it. Another big thing is support. My hostin
Re:Ho ho. offtopic grammar pedantry (Score:2)
Here here.
You're looking for "Hear, hear!" as in "Hear, Ye! Hear Ye!" or "Listen to me!"
Sorry, we each have our grammar-nazi burdens to bear. I just bared mine.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, we each have our grammar-nazi burdens to bear. I just bared mine.
I hate you.
Re:Ho ho. (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a long time Redhat user. Have used Redhat since 4.2 and continued using it when it changed names to "Fedora." I'll be doing my install of Fedora 11 tonight I hope... too many things to do today. But one thing is certain -- I would never use Fedora to serve as a server. I know there are people who do, and god bless their hearts because they enable whatever they find to be included in with Redhat Enterprise Linux. The reason? No long term support. Ubuntu offers an LTS release every so often while also offering more cutting edge stuff as well. But Fedora is not exactly a cutting edge distro either. It is usually quite stable... people on the cutting edge use Rawhide.
So with all that said, I use CentOS (and variants) on the server side and Fedora on the desktop. I have used CentOS on the desktop and it's okay, but it's pretty dull by comparison to Fedora for obvious reasons.
Without long term support, a server will be a lot more work than it needs to be. I recall stepping into a role where the company's web site was hosted on a Fedora 4 server. I was shocked. I got that stuff rectified as soon as possible... Fedora 4 support has long since expired so there was no way to keep it updated. I moved to new hosting and put it all under CentOS. Done and done for years to come. Well, that's not entirely true -- I don't work there any more and I know the outsource company they hired isn't smart enough to manage those servers. (Why is it that almost all IT outsource services are Microsoft partnered and all but refuse anything to do with Linux or Mac OS?)
Re: (Score:2)
Calling those two boxes "servers" was probably too generous. They just run headless and do compute work pretty much non-stop, that's why I called them "servers". I use CentOS for internet-facing servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Fedora 4 support has long since expired so there was no way to keep it updated.
At that point, it's just a slackware machine. Download the source for new versions of stuff and compile. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Completely agree, it should be noted a lot of people here seem to think fedora is a 'desktop' os in the same way as ubuntu etc etc. I'd argue that it's an os 'for developers, by developers'.
Since it's so bleeding edge, when things sometimes unnoticably break upstream, they can break with fedora too, if you have a lot of experience it's usually not even an issue though and you can fix it yourself
20 seconds? Mama mia (Score:5, Interesting)
A 20 second boot? What happens after that?
Re:20 seconds? Mama mia (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It takes 15 minutes to log in.
Fedora 11 is now available on BitTorrent (Score:5, Funny)
Damn pirates.
With Apologies to Frank Herbert... (Score:2)
"The `//areZ must flow." ;)
Too many releases! (Score:3, Funny)
Seriously, why does linux have so many release cycles. That's one thing I didnt like about Ubuntu. It took me forever to get it running just the way I wanted and by then a new version was out and I had the pressure to upgrade..and of course..I had to set up everything again since invariably, it broke something.
It's funny how many people here bitched that windows was coming out with Win 7 so soon after vista, but they don't mind that linux seems to release something every couple months depending on the distro. Odd.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
why does linux have so many release cycles...It's funny how many people here bitched that windows was coming out with Win 7 so soon after vista, but they don't mind that linux seems to release something every couple months depending on the distro. Odd./quote. Not really. If you knew which packages to download, it would be relatively easy to upgrade from one version of the distro to another. With Windows, you're on one version or another, and there's no way for you to get the latest version of their kernel unless you upgrade. As long as you get onto one of the LTS versions of Ubuntu, you'd be able to wait for as long as you could on Windows. Moving quickly is the biggest strength of open source development. That and choice, so that'd be the two big strengths of open source. And the community.
Re:Too many releases! (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, our three main weapons are speed, choice, community and an almost fanatical devotion to freedom.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
You said it: among the best qualities of Linux there will always be speed, choice, community, freedom, the fact that it costs nothing, and the body hair of Alan Cox.
Re:Too many releases! (Score:5, Insightful)
why does linux have so many release cycles
Because Fedora is a cutting-edge testing release that's done about twice a year. The RedHat Linux way is to take software that Microsoft would only make available to internal testers in Redmond, and make it available to the general public as "Fedora".
If you want something with fewer release cycles, you're best bet is Red Hat Enterprise Linux (which every three years or so, takes a release of Fedora, declares it stable, renames it "RHEL", and updates that version of Fedora for seven years). If you're too cheap to buy RHEL, you can get CentOS [centos.org], which is a free derivative of RHEL. CentOS 5.3 is the Linux equivalent of "CentOS 5, service pack 3" [1]
[1] Well, except that adding new drivers to older releases of CentOS is harder than it is to do with Microsoft Windows. What can I say, Linux isn't perfect.
Re: (Score:2)
I sympathize, although for my desktop system I do prefer just grabbing the latest stable stuff every nine months or so ala the Ubuntu release cycle. But for a server of course, it's nice to have things stable. Or is it UI changes that bug you?
But as the Anonymous One suggested, there are other flavors of Linux which move at a slower pace, such as http://debian.org/ [debian.org] or RHEL (or the free version of it, CentOS).
Re: (Score:2)
"It took me forever to get it running just the way I wanted and by then a new version was out and I had the pressure to upgrade..and of course..I had to set up everything again since invariably, it broke something."
Took forever, pressure to upgrade, invariably broke something. Nice totalizing language, troll. You don't have to upgrade, and if you choose to, just do an in-place upgrade. In going from Hardy to Intrepid to Jaunty this has worked flawlessly for me.
"It's funny how many people here bitched that w
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
GP may be trolling or not, but don't imagine that upgrades are always hearts and flowers.
Oh, and I'm not upgrading my Fedora 10 box right away, either, just in case.
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, I don't recall many people bitching about Win7 coming out so soon after Vista
That's not true at all (well, it's not true that it hasn't occurred, although I don't doubt you when you say you don't recall it). I've heard plenty of bitching about this topic. I think that the GP has a valid point, except that he's fallaciously acting as if the users all have the same opinions.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously, why does linux have so many release cycles.
Because people want the latest versions of software?
That's one thing I didnt like about Ubuntu. It took me forever to get it running just the way I wanted and by then a new version was out and I had the pressure to upgrade..and of course..I had to set up everything again since invariably, it broke something.
You didn't have to upgrade at all. No one forces you to do so if everything already works just fine.
It's funny how many people here bitched that windows was coming out with Win 7 so soon after vista, but they don't mind that linux seems to release something every couple months depending on the distro. Odd.
Because it doesn't cost me a couple of hundred dollars to upgrade from Ubuntu 9.04 to 9.10? Or from Fedora 10 to 11? I'm sure that has nothing to do with it.
Re: (Score:2)
What's bad about Ubuntu is the crazy upgrade restrictions. Often you can only upgrade to the newest version from the immediately previous version. Then you try to upgrade to the previous version and find that the upgrade is no longer available. What a mess!
Re: (Score:2)
Linux doesn't have short release cycles, distros do. Only some of them at that, if you want a slow release cycle install Debian stable.
Use a long-term support release (Score:2)
If you want fewer releases use a long term support release.
For Ubuntu they are marked LTS and come out every two years. The last was 8.04 (Hardy)
For Fedora / RedHat they are the RedHat Enterprise Linux releases, and are about every three years, or the free CentOS copy of same.
And I don't remember anyone bitching about Win 7 coming out. Despite the bias towards linux around here I think most people will be glad to see the back of Vista.
Re: (Score:2)
It took me forever to get it running just the way I wanted and by then a new version was out and I had the pressure to upgrade
You were pressured to upgrade? Some mafia-style hitmen came and demanded that you upgrade?
My home desktop runs Fedora 7. Sure, it has had no updates for almost a year, but it is working well for what I use it for (video encoding). Why upgrade if you don't really feel like it? My machine is probably going to be upgraded soon, since I'd like the system not to be too old, but I hardly feel any pressure to upgrade every time. I try each release in a VM, before I decide if the real home machine will get an upgra
Re: (Score:2)
If you are unsure about these new fangled computers, use Windows. It slows everything down nicely.
take a screenshot tour (Score:5, Interesting)
--
I like it except it doesn't have X feeture
Re: (Score:2)
I realize it's a desktop OS as well, but whenever I think of "screenshots" for Linux, my eye twitches.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Gnome screens are Gnome screens are Gnome screens. However, that particular pages contains screenshots of Sugar as well, which I believe was for the OLPC or some such. But, I've never seen it before to realize just what a hideous, obnoxious mess thing it really is. Thus, for me, it was worth following the link.
Re: (Score:2)
This is cool and all, but it doesn't have a screenshot of what I want: sound.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Fedora 11 Screenshot Tour [fedoraproject.org]
So... just like Ubuntu only blueier.
Perhaps we could roll a new Ubuntu sub-project: Blubuntu
This will probably become RHEL6 (Score:4, Interesting)
This release of Fedora is the release that will probably be the basis for the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL). This is a good thing, because I like using commercial software on Linux (read: I like using VMware Player to run virtual machines), and right now RHEL 5 does not run with the 2007-era hardware I have, being based on a version of Fedora from 2006.
Once this becomes RHEL, commercial ISVs (Independent Software Vendors) will start supporting the release and both the hardware I use and the commercial software I need to be productive (sorry guys, I find VirtualBox a lot more buggy and less intuitive to use than VMware) will be supported in a version of Linux that will have the stability I need.
Can anyone confirm that RHEL6 will be based on Fedora 11?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Wikipedia says yes [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
This is a good thing, because I like using commercial software on Linux (read: I like using VMware Player to run virtual machines),
Why would you need RHEL to run VMware Player? It's been in the Ubuntu repositories since 6.06.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that VMWare doesn't officially support Ubuntu.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This seems likely. A bunch of stuff slipped from 11 to 12, and a bunch of 11 is still broken.
12 might even have Xen Dom0 on pv_ops with 2.6.30.
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia disagrees with you.
Encryption (Score:2)
Fedora is probably the only general audience distribution that supports disk encryption and lockup security features user-friendly and out-of-the-box.
Has anyone got full disk encryption in daily use?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I had until I caught a bad case of brain-dead and nuked the LUKS header on my /home partition. (I wanted to resize an LVM volume and called pvcreate on the wrong partition)
That header consists of 512 bytes which contain the only key to your precious data. No redundant keys and no backups (see below). The LUKS dev team's advice on this issue is:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, we use it at work (it was mandated recently that we must encrypt and that Linux can use FDE). I was going to switch from F10 to openSuse but openSuse 11.1 doesn't support FDE yet, only individual partition encryption, (apparently it is in the works for 11.2) and so I went to F11 preview. Tick one box on install, give it a password and off you go.
Ubuntu does support it as well, but it is on the "alternative" disk rather than the standard disk. I don't know much more than that, though, because I've never
Re: (Score:2)
You do realise you're still leaving yourself vulnerable there, don't you? If any of your data is copied to /tmp then it'll be unencrypted. Even if it is deleted from /tmp it might still be recoverable. Just encrypting /home seems a bit like locking your front door but leaving your back door open.
As for not putting it on desktop machines, it depends on how concerned you are. We've got to do it at work, and it is probably good to do it at home in case you ever sell your HDD (it'll make sure that the data can'
Yay, KMS! (Score:4, Interesting)
Fedora 11 is the first release of any major distribution to include kernel mode-setting (KMS) for Intel GMA, ATI Radeon, and nVidia TNT2/GeForce chipsets. This is an excellent step forward in terms of moving off of crufty old graphics APIs and being able to use video cards in a more uniform, reliable manner.
Preupgrade (Score:4, Interesting)
So far, this upgrade is going smoothly. According to the release notes, I should see an improvement in battery life. We'll see...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(Currently installing package 1339 of 1474 (gutenprint-foomatic)) It's got a while left...
Re: (Score:2)
So far, admittedly after only a few minutes of playing with it, I'd call this upgrade a success. And, it was as simple as running 'preupgrade' as root.
Next, my headless bitTorrent/web/samba box gets to go from fc9 to fc11.
Fedora server components are not bleeding-edge (Score:3, Informative)
The desktop may be bleeding-edge, but the server components are rock-solid.
I might have a tough time adjusting the volume or getting the desktop applets to work right, but the server implementations are stable and work right every time.
Meh... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry... I'll get off your lawn. :)
Arch Linux (Score:2)
I'll get off your lawn since I only started using Linux since 1.0.8 ;)
Might wanna try out Arch Linux. It kind of reminds me of Slack - just with a proper package manager and without an opinionated (B)DFL. BSD-style init, everything is generally real easy to configure by hand, and the packages are pretty close to vanilla. They are binary so usually you don't have to waste time compiling them yourself, but when you need to, it's real easy - their "automated build system" (ABS) is mighty cool. The base install
11? (Score:3, Interesting)
Whoops. Completely missed 11. I've been tracking 12 [google.com].
(Alpha comes out July 7)
20 Second Startup Time (Score:4, Insightful)
Is that on my grandmother's Pentium II laptop or my boss's multi-core workstation? Startup time seems like an arbitrary statistic for a Linux distribution that should run on a broad range of outdated and current hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yea, KDE 4.2.3 will never be as polished as the commercial Vis, er Windows 7 1/2 Operating System
KDE 4.2.3 [youtube.com] KDE 4.3 Beta [youtube.com] Gnome 2.26.1 [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Jeeze, how much caffeine was that guy on who was demonstrating KDE 4.3 Beta?
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, that 4.3 video makes it look horrible. It still has slow screen redraws and weird artifacts when moving windows.
You're judging that from a youtube video with its insanely low framerate? Retard.
Re:The stats are looking good (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
5. Non-Simple Update from Different Revision of the OS. Maybe I am ignorant but These this hinder linux from becoming a complete powerhouse.
You are ignorant. To ugprade from one Ubuntu revision to another requires hitting a single button marked "upgrade". Wow, that was so hard.
Re: (Score:2)
The trolls are out in force today.
Deps? Stick with a good modern desktop distro and you'll have no problems with deps. Ditto package managers. Pick a distro that uses the one you like.
Too many distros? WTF? Just pick one! You are not obligated to care about multiple distros.
What do you care about how people choose to spend their coding time and skills? So what if there are a lot of choices for this and that? Pick one that you like!
Linux is a rather complete powerhouse. Perhaps that is what is bothering you
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe you'd prefer the release notes [fedoraproject.org] or the tour [fedoraproject.org] instead?
Re: (Score:2)
I HATE installing and especially configuring new OSes!
If you ever find you need to do a lot of that, RH (IIRC, even back in the old RH5,6,7 days) has a auto-configuration dealy-who called kickstart which can auto-configure a new install for you, just like the previous install. Occasionally comes in handy (not quite as handy as Ghost/partimage, but sometimes the hardware differences are just too much for Ghost/partimage, or you want to have a clean setup).
Re: (Score:2)