Fedora 27 Released

The Fedora Project has announced the general availability of Fedora 27 Workstation and Fedora 27 Atomic editions. Fedora 27 brings with it "thousands of improvements" from both the Fedora Community and various upstream software projects, the team said on Tuesday. From a post on Fedora Magazine: The Workstation edition of Fedora 27 features GNOME 3.26. In the new release, both the Display and Network configuration panels have been updated, along with the overall Settings panel appearance improvement. The system search now shows more results at once, including the system actions. GNOME 3.26 also features color emoji support, folder sharing in Boxes, and numerous improvements in the Builder IDE tool. The new release also features LibreOffice 5.4.

Re:

[iggymanz]

if "color emojis" is touted as a major system feature, you know your dealing with a distro that panders to juveniles. Just as systemd makes them squeal. "oooo, my system boots up faster!"

Re: systemd?

[Zero__Kelvin]

Fast booting isn't the big reason to use systemd, and you either know that and are trolling or don't, thereby making anything you say about systemd uninformed drivel. Of course there is a third, most likely option, to wit you know that and are trolling, and everything you say about systemd is uninformed drivel. Keep holding your breath for the day when people will be ditching Linux because it has a vastly improved init system.

Re:

[KiloByte]

Fast booting isn't the big reason to use systemd

It's not, as systemd boots slower than sane inits. This doesn't stop this reason from being included in systemd advertising (although they've mostly moved to touting other fake advantages).

Keep holding your breath for the day when people will be ditching Linux because it has a vastly improved init system.

Well, which one do you have in mind? Because I can't think of one that's drastically better than others, although there is one that's drastically worse.

Re:

[iggymanz]

Some people are into scat; Poettering has been squatting and shitting into the open source pool for decades.

Re: systemd?

[Zero__Kelvin]

Yep. He's the most powerful guy on the planet, and nobody else on the planet wants to be able to use their audio unless that are willing to make the audio chipset the driving factor in all their laptop purchasing decisions. Truly brilliant analysis of the situation!

Re: systemd?

[Zero__Kelvin]

Thanks for showing that you know literally nothing about it.

Re:

[boudie2]

Trump would know what needs to be done. "Lennart, you're fired!"

Re: systemd?

[Brockmire]

Whining about megabytes of disk usage in 2017 makes you a little bitch.

Re:

[ContextSwitch]

Thank-you I will. I'm happy to proceed using this distro without the burden of your ideology.

Re:

[iggymanz]

fine if you're running a laptop or home pc

for those of us who administor hundreds of machines, we've found systemd to be unpredictable, unreliable, and needlessly complex garbage

Re:

[iggymanz]

possibly "paying later" thus far has taken over 20 years...

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

for those of us who administor hundreds of machines, we've found systemd to be unpredictable, unreliable, and needlessly complex garbage

Ahh I knew I missed the yearly bulletin of Illiterate System Administrators.

Re:

[iggymanz]

Thank those who make spell correction systems for phones.

Re: Systemd, DBUS, Pulseaudio, and Gnome3

[Zero__Kelvin]

What you say is fair; he should have said incompetent and ignorant, but perhaps not illiterate.

Re:

[iggymanz]

I've read your systemd shilling, you are the ignorant one. Wise admins are running long term stable versions of distros that aren't yet poisoned by systemd, or they are running BSD.

Re: Systemd, DBUS, Pulseaudio, and Gnome3

[Zero__Kelvin]

You probably actually believe OS X is one of the BSDs. ROTFLMAO

Re:Systemd, DBUS, Pulseaudio, and Gnome3

[MSG]

You speak only for yourself. Many of use who operate large server farms are quite happy with systemd. And the evidence suggests that those who integrate systems prefer systemd, as there are vanishingly few distributions that don't use systemd either exclusively or by default.

Re: Systemd, DBUS, Pulseaudio, and Gnome3

[Zero__Kelvin]

Stop making shit up. You are the one with no actual experience with it. It has been in widespread use for 5 years, and every major distribution has chosen it. You really need to start trying to look for a different troll topic. systemd has been accepted by all the major players in the Linux world at this point. You make it abundantly clear what a fool and/or troll you are when you try to pretend otherwise.

Re:

[Seven Spirals]

No experience? LOL. I teach Redhat classes to RHCE students (and I am a certified RH instructor and RHCE myself). I've worked in multiple environments with over 300,000 sqft of populated data center and (tens of) thousands of Linux systems. I've personally been running some form of Linux since 1993 (SLS was my first distro). I'm a C programmer and have written Linux device drivers. You, on the other hand, sound like a teenager with no job experience angry that someone attacked your Steam platform. Get an ac

Re: Systemd, DBUS, Pulseaudio, and Gnome3

[Zero__Kelvin]

Yeah, OK buddy. My SlashID alone should have been enough to show I haven't been a teen in a LONG time, just as the content of your posts show you lie through your fucking teeth.

Re:

[meosborne]

Ah, you're just a youngling. :-)

Re:

[MartinG]

I haven't had problems with systemd for years now. There were problems long ago, but it's solid now for me on server and desktop alike.

Can you provide some information about the problems you are having or link to issue reports?

Re:Which is better

[freak0fnature]

It depends on what you want to do. Steam games generally get full support for Ubuntu first, less so on Fedora. I can play TF2 natively, but both Portal games crash on me. But if you ask my boss, he would say that debian packaging is superior to RPM especially when dealing with dependency issues.

Re:

[Thelasko]

Fedora, or Debian? Or some other "original" Linux distro? Why would you select one over the other?

Besides package management, the deciding factor for me is release cadence. Fedora frequently has new releases, and to me, it feels like I need to spend an unreasonable amount of time upgrading my OS. Debian releases are much slower. However, you won't have the newest software.

A good compromise has been the long term releases (LTS) for Ubuntu, which is every two years.

Re: Which is better

[Zero__Kelvin]

You dont have to switch just because 27 is released. It doesn't work that way.

Re:

[Thelasko]

You dont have to switch just because 27 is released. It doesn't work that way.

How much support do the older releases get? My impression is, if you want support, you upgrade.

Re: Which is better

[Wdomburg]

It is documented in their release schedule:

"We say maintained for approximately 13 months because the supported period for releases is dependent on the date the release under development goes final. As a result, Release X is supported until one month after the release of Release X+2.

This translates into:
Fedora 26 will be maintained until 1 month after the release of Fedora 28.
Fedora 27 will be maintained until 1 month after the release of Fedora 29."

If you want more stability, there's CentOS, which has a new release every 3-4 years, but will provide updates for 10 years. The core release doesn't have the latest software, but that is what Software Collections are for.

Re:

[CronoCloud]

I always recommend holding off for a few weeks on Fedora distro upgrades anyway. Servers are less busy and if there's a few package issues they'll have them ironed out by then.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Fedora, or Debian? Or some other "original" Linux distro? Why would you select one over the other?

Besides package management, the deciding factor for me is release cadence. Fedora frequently has new releases, and to me, it feels like I need to spend an unreasonable amount of time upgrading my OS. Debian releases are much slower. However, you won't have the newest software.

A good compromise has been the long term releases (LTS) for Ubuntu, which is every two years.

Actually, Fedora has kick ass upgrade system so new releases are welcome. The upgrade is built into the software center and so far it has worked flawlessly. I have never seen any other distro that has as good upgrade setup that just works.

So you can have best of both worlds - stability and new software at the same time.

By the way, you can also upgrade like this from shell if that is what you prefer:
$ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=27
$ sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot

Re:

[ContextSwitch]

By the way, you can also upgrade like this from shell if that is what you prefer: $ sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=27 $ sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot

This is my preferred method, you do have to install dnf-plugin-system-upgrade first though. The process is described here [fedoraproject.org].

I'm relatively new to fedora, jumping on board at version 25 but I have been pleasantly surprised at how easy the last to distro upgrades have been.

Re:Which is better

[CronoCloud]

The Fedora equivalent to Ubuntu LTS would be the official Red Hat releases or CentOS.

Re:

[guacamole]

Fedora is fine for a home desktop or some kind of a tinkering or development box. For work, I prefer CentOS or RHEL, which normally have +5 years of support and updated drivers and install images.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot?

[jfdavis668]

It's a technology story. Far more relevant than the story about Germany burning too much coal.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux on the desktop, bro!!11! High Five! W00t! Belly bump!!one!!1!cos(0)!!

AMIRIGHT?