Slashdot Mirror

"The question is whether red hat, oracle, or microsoft will embrace or extend their own separate ways "

There is no Red Hat SQL Server product from Red Hat. They use Mariadb or MySQL, depending upon the distribution version. So we can readily state emphatically, and with glee, that Red Hat will not embrace and extend their SQL offering ;-)

RTFM! ;-) (I've always wanted to say that. I don't think I've ever actually said it - in referencing the actual man pages.
http://www.freedesktop.org/sof...

Fedora's got a good bit of documentation on it that goes beyond just the man pages:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki...

I'm generally a Lubuntu user so:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/system...
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/System...

That last link is really pretty good - it doesn't look like it, judging by the URL, but it's pretty good at giving some info. From the second link, the one to the Fedora site, there's a link on that page that's actually pretty good. It's worth a read and it's explaining why they, the Fedora project, are going (went) with systemd. I'll save you the time and add a direct link to that as well.
http://0pointer.de/blog/projec...

I paid for my copy, it's paper, but this site claims that is Creative Commons and has a link to both the book and the web code examples, it appears to be legit so I'm going to go ahead and link it. It's the 2015 (9th Edition) Linux Bible. I own a copy, as mentioned, in dead tree format and have been happy with it as both a browse/read and reference book. It has some information about systemd in it as well. You can download the copy and code examples, free of charge, at this site:
http://appnee.com/linux-bible-...

A quick look says that it's the same as my paper book so I'm assuming that the content is the same.

Keep in mind, I'm not a systemd aficionado or anything. I've just never had cause to hate it like everyone says I should. So, I did a bunch of reading and I've done a bunch of thinking, some poking and testing, and haven't had a problem with it. I learned a few new commands, they've come in handy, and I'm pretty happy with it - so far.

User phantomfive (here on this site) has been doing a code review of it. I believe he's at section 12 now. That might be worth a read. You can get to his account easily enough by simply changing the URL. This should work: http://slashdot.org/~phantomfi... and you can get to his journal from there. The navigation will be on the left but I suspect you know that.

If you need stuff to "just work please and thank you" then, well, my experience has been that it just works. I, too, am no expert and have been learning more and more as I go - that's exactly why I switched to using Linux exclusively. I simply wasn't learning anything any more. I was stagnant and, well, there wasn't much more to learn about Windows. I'd already done the MVP thing, I'd been awarded the award multiple years in a row in several categories. I gave up my participation, burned out really, and just paid for my own damned MSDN subscription. So, it's been serving that purpose nicely for a while now. I'm getting older, to the point where it's time for me to legitimately worry about maintaining cognitive functions. I'd become lethargic, a passive consumer, and was not happy with that state of affairs. Thus, the switch and the ensuing switch to using it exclusively because I found that, even dual booting, I'd still just boot to Linux and I rebooted so seldom that I was often in the middle of something and needing to return to Windows to finish it. So, Linux it is... I had managed Unix just fine, so off I went... It's been a fun ride.

As an interesting (to me) aside: It's amazing how quickly things become normal. I had the opportunity to sit in front of a Windows 10 system for a brief spell. I was lost for a while. I've also had one occasion to sit in front of a more familiar Windows 7 system and, still, I was lost. I'd actually f

Not sure I understand the assertion that MAC is used sparingly ... e.g. Ubuntu has AppArmor on by default, with many profiles in enforcing mode out of the box (Ubuntu security docs), Fedora Core has SELinux on by default, with protection for many apps in place (Fedora Core SELinux info).

And that is the whole fun point of it all: AICCU (or anything else) cannot fix network problems time issues or wrongly entered passwords automagically either....

Hence why it logs a message to what the problem is and EXITS. Note: it does not *crash* as what everybody seems to call a proper exit(code) call.

Restarting AICCU thus does not resolve anything unless the administrator of the host intervenes by fixing the relevant problem.

As for "Fedora fixing it", checking: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/... there is no "fix" there, they just added the requested "wait for ntp sync" flag to systemd which only solves one small part of the problem (no valid time yet, at which point one cannot do crypto, thus why are you connecting to online services at all?).

Without functional network connectivity it still won't start though, and that makes sense as there is nothing to connect to and thus it cannot do anything, hence it properly logs a message (that clearly nobody reads, because why would one read log messages) and then exits.

Note that systemd/Redhat folks are not the only ones who do not seem to understand the real problem here and think they can magically "fix" things while the host itself is not the problem (eg no network connectivity, broken connectivity, broken time setting, broken timezone setting, wrong password etc etc etc).

See also:
  https://www.sixxs.net/news/201...

How does it compare to yum in Fedora and CentOS?

Nowadays, they're pretty much equal. Years ago that didn't used to be the case. APT used to have far more packages available in the default repositories as compared to YUM, and used to perform quite a bit better. At some point YUM switched to using sqlite to store it's metadata which improved performance quite a bit, and the availability of the EPEL repository greatly increased the number of packages available to be on par with APT.

Why guess?

https://lists.fedoraproject.or...
Fedora, September 14.

http://www.ubuntuupdates.org/p...
Ubuntu, September 17

I honestly believe that arguing about this is silly, but it's especially silly when you're wrong. :-)

Honest question. I want to know.

Because I run Linux on VMs when I'm trying to do platform-specific work (and, as a core developer for a library with rather a lot of platform-dependent - and platform-OS-version-dependent - code implementing those attempting-to-be-mostly-platform-independent APIs, there's a fair bit of that involved).

As a result, I want to spend as little time as possible dicking with the OS, leaving as much time as possible to actually adding new capabilities and fixing bugs. Ubuntu seems to do a good job of that; if you have another distribution to recommend for this, please do. Note that, whilst I haven't yet had to do any kernel work (other people fixed the kernel issues before I got around to building a kernel with my changes), I'd like a distribution where the process of building and installing a new kernel is as simple a process as possible. Fedora fails here. (In the OS on which I last did kernel work, it's pretty much

make; mv /mach_kernel /mach_kernel.save; cp mach_kernel /; reboot

and it was, as I remember, similarly simple in the previous UN*X on which I did kernel work.)

It's a fact that the fix for corrupt logs, which systemd will often corrupt if you power-cycle your system, is to delete them and throw them away. https://lwn.net/Articles/621453/ https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/185702.html

No, it's not a fact. If the log file is corrupt journald rotates it. It doesn't "delete it and throw it away".

It's a fact that the fix for corrupt logs, which systemd will often corrupt if you power-cycle your system, is to delete them and throw them away. https://lwn.net/Articles/621453/ https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/185702.html It's a fact that systemd will only sometimes recover any part of its bullshit binary logs, and only any part after any error. So if journald truncates a file because it shits itself, which it has been known to do, then you lose the whole log.

Your facts are plain lies, any sysadmin can see that. systemd does not corrupt logs when you power-cycle your system either, the fact of power cycling your system is actually what corrupts your file-system, and that's not even always the case.
Stop using "data=writeback" on your ext4 FS, take the performance hit and start using "data=ordered" instead of spreading lies, perhaps your FS will leave you alone then.
Up to this morning, I used the journal to debug an embedded system (raspberry pi) that would not boot, for which I don't have a console nor ssh access. I just shut it down electrically, then get the SD card, then read the journal file from another system. Guess what: the entire file is readable every single time (I've done it a lot to debug boot problems) with journalctl, with even the kernel boot messages as thanks to systemd, I get really everything in the log.

It's a fact that the fix for corrupt logs, which systemd will often corrupt if you power-cycle your system, is to delete them and throw them away. https://lwn.net/Articles/621453/ https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-July/185702.html It's a fact that systemd will only sometimes recover any part of its bullshit binary logs, and only any part after any error. So if journald truncates a file because it shits itself, which it has been known to do, then you lose the whole log.

Moderators, you might want to familiarize yourself with the festering pile of shit which is Lennart Poettering, as well as the pile of crap which is systemd, before you moderate any systemd discussions. Because you clearly have no idea what you're doing.

Yeah, I'm not totally sure myself, but it seems to me it's not even available on Gentoo, where we use the MAD Gstreamer decoder plugin for MP3 decoding...

From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Installing_the_Fluendo_MP3_plugin the plugin should be located at: /usr/lib/gstreamer-1.0/libgstflump3dec.so (and I don't have it, even with gst-plugins-bad and media-libs/gst-plugins-ugly installed).

From https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=281083 they say the plugin was included in gst-plugins-bad, but this dates back to 2009, so things may have changed...

Hmmmm... http://cgit.freedesktop.org/gstreamer/gst-plugins-bad/tree/gst/mpegdemux actually says the plugin originated from Fluendo, but is this really the version talked about in the very (intentionally?) limited report, or a simple fork for which the issue may have been fixed long ago, while not fixed in the official Fluendo version which apparently few really use?

Or does Mozilla ships the plugin themselves? It does not seem to be included in the files installed by Firefox on Gentoo, unless it's been statically linked inside some other file... Even if Mozilla ships it, it's very possible Gentoo does not install it, to use the libraries available on the system...

The Mozilla bug report is still private even though the fix is supposed to be already shipped in Firefox 37...

The relation between Fluendo and Gstreamer is quite blurry too... They employed the main Gstreamer devs for some time, then they left and founded another company, but gstreamer.com is still owned by Fluendo, but they link to the Freedesktop servers to get Gstreamer...

What happens when your PC is restricted by the so-called Secure Boot scheme is well known.

And the OEMs provide a switch to turn it off.

The problem we're discussing here is the potential impossibility to disable it induced by Microsoft into future computers.

That is the OEMs choice, just like is their choice whether to even give you access to the BIOS. We've seen the same thing with default BIOS passwords before too, the hysterical idiots crying "what if the OEMs dont tell us the passwords?!". Blaming Microsoft when the onus is on the OEM is obvious stupidity or intentional malicious misdirection.

What happens when your PC is restricted by the so-called Secure Boot scheme is well known. The problem we're discussing here is the potential impossibility to disable it induced by Microsoft into future computers.

Lots of comments about Linux on XPS series; I've had up-and-down experiences with hardware build quality with those but what I can solidly recommend is the Dell Latitude series - currently E6540 or the 7000. They're a bit pricey but like the Thinkpad and HP ProBook these are business-oriented machines with great warranty support, and upgradeable parts. And Linux runs just great on them - I write this on a slightly older 6440 with Fedora 21 on it; never had any issues even though Fedora is a relatively "pure" distro that doesn't come with proprietary drivers. I would also recommend Fedora as good mainstream distro for work in the sciences - all the packages you would want to run on a laptop (R/scipy etc) are available as rpms: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/....

You still don't get it. Just because he works at Red Hat does NOT mean that every single thing that he does when he's not doing his regular work is copyright Red Hat, approved by Red Hat and is set for inclusion in the next RHEL release. He does personal projects too, every single good programmer does that. Some of them takes of, this one did.

But consider for a moment that you're right, that as soon as you've seen a @redhat.com email address in the wild then that is confirmation that it represents Red Hat's official opinion and goals, then how do you explain this? An @redhat.com email back in 2011 that downright criticizes systemd for being too big and too bloated, in 2011!
https://lists.fedoraproject.or...

both Fedora and Ubuntu have moved towards mobile-oriented GUIs.

Which you don't have to use.

https://spins.fedoraproject.or...

Or of you installed the standard version with gnome 3 you can:

yum group install "Xfce Desktop" or whatever desktop group you want.

yum install exfat-utils fuse-exfat

For others trying this: exfat-utils and fuse-exfat are in RPM Fusion because patent issues block their inclusion with Fedora.

You assume more restrictions than what is actually available or possible.

I agree that there is no technical restriction. But political restrictions can still be relevant, especially when it comes to bringing the required parts through United States customs. The MGM v. Grokster decision enshrined secondary liability through inducement in U.S. case law, and including the SDXC marking could be seen as inducement to infringe a patent by installing the exFAT packages.

I really need to bite the bullet one day and switch to a distribution that does not worship at the church of bleeding edge.

That, and stop complaining about a product that is clearly advertised as being bleeding edge.

I upgraded from F20 via fedup and these instruction, and had zero problems: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki...

A list of the torrents for F21: http://torrents.fedoraproject....

"If it has systemd it can get right back into custody." It does http://docs.fedoraproject.org/...

High traffic due to F21 release: http://status.fedoraproject.org/

Fedora 21 Public Active Mirrors: http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/21/

High traffic due to F21 release: http://status.fedoraproject.org/

Fedora 21 Public Active Mirrors: http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/21/

Fedora Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki...

It's still got systemd in it, but you can always choose to use a different distro. That's the great thing about Free software.

Actually from Fedora I get least the beta feeling. They have a good amount of developers working on the components and fixing bugs, and they at least pretend to have some kind of real quality assurance.

>> If it wasn't for Red Hat, Linux wouldn't exist today.

Thanks for the laugh. I really didn't think anyone could be that clueless.

Your high UID suggest that you weren't around when Linux was young. If it wasn't for Red Hat, Linux wouldn't have made it as a viable commercial alternative to MS, period!
Red Hats technical contributions alone was a huge factor in Linux' success. The fact that RH understood to make money on Open Source software, something most other Linux vendors failed to do or even understand, made it possible to hire lots of software engineers, and pay lawyers to defend Linux from the barrage of constant patent lawsuits Linux faced. Remember the SCO case? And while IBM lawyers played a role in that too, IBM was only involved because RH had made Linux enterprise ready.

Here is an old statistic from 2007 that shows how much of the Linux kernel that is written by RH.
http://www.cnet.com/news/who-w...
The pattern have been like this more or less since the late 1990's.
Same with other core Linux projects like gcc, kernel utils, glibc, etc. Take a look of this incomplete list:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/...

Most other Linux distros are thriving in the slipstream of the development made by Red Hat in all core aspects of Linux as an OS.

A Fedora community member releases periodic respins of Fedora stable releases; they're not official releases and they don't go through QA but FWIW I'd trust the guy if I needed a respun image in a pinch. http://jbwillia.wordpress.com/ is his site, you can find the spins at https://alt.fedoraproject.org/... .

From the Fedora home page "Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat".

There is a big difference between "sponsoring" and "owning". Sure some of the features of Fedora get incorporated into a commercial release of Redhat Linux but because Fedora is open source those same features can be incorporated into other Linux distros.

You will always find that commercial releases of a Linux distro are at least one to two years behind a stable release and a development release can be a couple of months to a year ahead of a stable release. As for Rehat making a separate distro (supported up to 10 years) to Fedora I fail to see that this is a problem.

Caveat: I am not a sysadmin. But I have read up on SystemD.

With systemd, one can't even remotely log a journal natively

Why not? SystemD offers its own logging system, but does nothing to prevent you from installing a more capable logging daemon such as rsyslog.

Note that before Fedora 20, rsyslog was installed by default, along with the SystemD logging. In the announcement it says:

rsyslog will remain the recommended option to install if users require /var/log/messages, need support for the syslog network protocol, or need to enforce strict data lifecycle policies. It's sufficient to install and start rsyslog to get /var/log/messages and BSD syslog support.

Emphasis added by me.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoDefaultSyslog

You stated "one can't even remotely log a journal"... well, one can if one is able to type: yum install rsyslog

So IMHO your whole argument fails. Not only is it not impossible, it's not even difficult.

...this entire proposition by samzenpus is inane. When one thinks backwards from what the motivations might be, none of them are good and make me lose that much more respect for the site.

The story was submitted by a user named "ewhac". Unless you are accusing "ewhac" of being a sock puppet fro samzenpus, this whole mini-rant seems rather pointless.

The one I see is if you try to stop and start it simultaneously (or, "within a racy amount of time"), there could be a race with the PID file.

There's an infinite loop near line 92 if for some reason BIND becomes unresponsive to signals. That actually happened to me, so that's why I can pinpoint it. And to add insult to injury, this loop happens during service shutdown and can leave the machine inaccessible remotely.

Now let's check the systemd's version of this file: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/... Please tell me which one is better.

You want people to test code on weird clusters

Not really. I simply want people to stop assuming that race conditions are rare and write reliable software.

Yet again, people who don't want to learn something different. They learned the old way (so get off their lawn). There is no question the old BSD and sysv stuff has served its purpose well. For the past 10-15 years I really wished the startup would do things better. There was no reason to cling to those old ways especially with the new hardware. None at all. New stuff makes sense and isn't that hard to learn. Tear yourself away from looking at porn or games for an evening and learn it. It won't hurt, I promise. RedHat has a man ( for dummies if that helps ) page here - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... . For most of you that's all you'll ever need to know. For guys like me - http://0pointer.de/blog/projec... .

Never see these discussions with Microsoft. It's their way (or the highway), right or wrong (mostly wrong). I didn't like it either. Spend about an hour, learn it, enjoy.

I realized without even looking at SystemD that it was retarded to put a freaking embedded webserver inside the init system...

This made me wonder if the AC was full of it or not. But, yes, it's true. Systemd embeds a webserver and a QR encoder.

Despite the fact that the there is a "risk of enabling the service by mistake (which, given that journal-gatewayd will happily serve private log data to the whole internet AFAICS, is has a pretty bad impact in this particular case)," (emphasis mine) the thread is quickly derailed to a series of unrelated discussions ignoring the issue raised by the user in the first message.

I guess this is a microcosm of what is pissing people off about systemd and its development...

This. People get all mad at Fedora for not being something it isn't. They very vocally err on the side of including more, rather than including what works. Criticizing what doesn't work in a Fedora release, without emphasizing what does, is missing (or ignoring) the whole point of Fedora.

As a long time Red Hat user (from before it was RHEL, and before there was a Fedora "core") I still think of Fedora as the rolling beta for RHEL. It's great to have access to, and it seems to me that since its introduction, it's really helped Red Hat step up its game. I use it as a desktop and to try new server technologies. I expect to tinker and am mostly just thankful for the opportunity.

While Fedora's generally quite usable for lots of thing, they even say you can use "other" things for "long-term stability" right on the "About Fedora" page.

"We believe in the power of innovation and showing off new work in our releases. Since we release twice a year, you never have to wait long to see the latest and greatest software, while there are other Linux products derived from Fedora you can use for long-term stability. We always keep Fedora moving forward so that you can see the future first."

http://fedoraproject.org/en/ab...

*And to the installer, I love the new installer. Simple as dirt, for anything more complicated, I use Kickstart, which as far as I know is still fully supported.

Unfortunately, Mukt completely mis-reported this and Slashdot picked up their errors for the summary, which is making for a lot of confusion.

tl;dr:

1. blivet-gui isn't supposed to (and in fact cannot) 'replace' gparted in any reasonable sense of that term.
2. blivet-gui is a new application, but its backend is the Fedora installer's storage management code, which is a very old codebase. There is no new storage management backend being written here.
3. Lennart and systemd have nothing at all to do with this.
4. It wouldn't really be practical to 'contribute' this to gparted, as it would involve completely ripping and replacing gparted's backend and then very rapidly proposing significant changes to the GUI, and hence would be a project takeover by any other name.
5. blivet uses standard underlying tools for performing operations, it's just a logic/configuration layer for them.

1: what the original announcement says is that blivet-gui uses a gparted-like UI to make it instantly familiar for gparted users. It doesn't say anything at all about it 'replacing' gparted. That's a pure invention (likely based on a misunderstanding) in the Mukt article. See the original announcement at https://lists.fedoraproject.or... to verify this, if you like. There's no sense in which blivet-gui really *could* "replace" gparted, if you think about it. gparted is an independent project; Red Hat doesn't own or maintain it, so Red Hat can't stop it existing or being maintained. gparted isn't a significant component for either RHEL or Fedora: it's just a leaf package, an app like any other. It's not like anaconda uses gparted as its partitioning tool, or anything like that. So talking about blivet-gui 'replacing' gparted doesn't make any sense, not upstream, not downstream. So long as upstream gparted devs see a need to keep developing gparted, gparted will continue to exist upstream, and so long as a Fedora packager wants gparted to be in Fedora, it'll be in Fedora, whether or not blivet-gui or any *other* storage management GUI app is also in Fedora. We have lots of space in the repos.

2: the backend for blivet-gui is blivet: https://git.fedorahosted.org/g... (packaged in Fedora as python-blivet). This codebase is simply the storage management backend of anaconda (the Fedora installer) split out into its own repository. The split happened back in 2012: http://www.redhat.com/archives... . The intent was to allow for exactly this kind of code re-use. So there really isn't some kind of new NIH effort going on here: the storage management code is not new, all that's new is the light wrapper around blivet to produce a standalone GUI app rather than using it as a part of the anaconda installer. The underlying codebase has existed basically as long as anaconda has existed, which is rather longer than gparted has existed. anaconda dates back to 1999 (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/History_of_Red_Hat_Linux ), gparted AFAICT dates back to 2004 (http://gparted.org/news.php?item=180 ).

3: Doesn't really need expanding on, but no, there is absolutely zero link to Lennart, systemd, or any other systemd developers.

4: so the reason to do blivet-gui at all, and the reason anaconda doesn't just call gparted for "partitioning" like ubiquity does, is it doesn't cover anywhere near the functionality we actually need for the Fedora (and, more to the point, RHEL) installer. gparted really is a *partitioning* tool, and there's a reason I keep referring to blivet as "storage management". It handles things that aren't just partitions. The most obvious examples are mdraid, LVM, and btrfs (insofar as btrfs acts as a volume management and redundancy system, not just as a simple filesystem like ext), but blivet has all sorts of other interesting capabilities too, primarily of interest t

Um, I don't think that is very likely:

https://lists.fedoraproject.or...

It is based on the blivet storage management library:

https://github.com/dwlehman/bl...

Which is also used by the Anaconda Fedore/Red Hat Enterprise Linux installer:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki...

And Open LMI:

https://fedorahosted.org/openl...

But it might indeed use libparted to create the actual partitions.

This is an email from Lennart Poettering to the Fedora Devel list dissing the Blivet GUI project due to implementation details:

https://lists.fedoraproject.or...

So Lennart Poettering actually really is involved, but in a rather different way than you would expect. :)

... Have your bothered to read the release message instead of rushing to press the "save" button you'd notice the following [1]:

"Why not use GParted you ask? The reason we came up with blivet-gui is that none of the existing storage management tools supports all storage technologies supported in modern Linux distributions. Anaconda does support them all so it's only logical to take Anaconda's storage backend, combine it with a nice, intuitive and in general user-friendly frontend and build a standalone application for storage management."

So, I assume that Fedora should also throw out their Anaconda installer, and somehow write a new installer based on parted (the library behind gparted), just so they "won't reinvent the wheel"?
Beyond that, what makes you so sure its even remotely possible to add iSCSI, BTRFS, LVM and Cryptofs support to gparted? As you are so quick to judge that Fedora is reinvent the wheel due to non-technical reasons, I assume you already know from personal experience that there are no design issues in adding the "missing features" to parted.

[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.or...

If you want to know the real reason all the major distro's love systemd it is the manpower savings they get on not having to maintain and tailor initscripts.

Seriously? Because frankly, they are just not that complicated. I'm actually pretty surprised that nobody has yet come up with an init script processor that isn't a shell, because most scripts boil down to a small handful of functions, especially given that most of the options are now in /etc/default. I haven't looked at a unit file yet (reading) It appears there's really no reason why you couldn't hashbang a simple processor at the top of your unit file that would source /etc/default/$0 if present, then source the unit file so you get expansions from your config file, and finally run a standard init stub that would use the resulting variables to start, stop, etc your service. That processor can, again, be a simple shell script. So why, again, do we need systemd to handle this problem?

To both of your points, both people not both points (sometimes I hate english :) ), Fedora is in the midst of trying to create something compelling. Specifically, a developer-focused desktop/distro/product called "Fedora Workstation." See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/... and come join us in making an environment that is targeted to developers and really tries to focus on developer needs rather than common users.

I have an Internet connection and have installed OpenBSD multiple times using just a single floppy disc.

But yeah, there was other solutions too. I don't remember whatever it was obvious how limited the live discs was.

Google download fedora:
http://fedoraproject.org/en_GB...
Only live CD listed there, doesn't mention anything about the installer being crippled and limit your options.

Pick desktop and nothing improves:
http://fedoraproject.org/en_GB...

Formats have both the DVD and Network Install CDs which imho is more useful, both of these likely work but since none of the limits of the previous is clearly stated I don't really see why one would go there if one didn't knew that was what one wanted. I have no real need for all the packages on the installation media and if I'm going to burn a CD anyway given a choice about network installer only or installer with a live copy of the OS I may pick the later because that give me a functioning machine now (and the number of MBs downloaded is close to completely irrelevant to me.)

Here the live CDs clearly state they are installed as is and can't be upgraded:
http://software.opensuse.org/1...
And that the DVD and Network mediums are suitable for installation.

I have an Internet connection and have installed OpenBSD multiple times using just a single floppy disc.

But yeah, there was other solutions too. I don't remember whatever it was obvious how limited the live discs was.

Google download fedora:
http://fedoraproject.org/en_GB...
Only live CD listed there, doesn't mention anything about the installer being crippled and limit your options.

Pick desktop and nothing improves:
http://fedoraproject.org/en_GB...

Formats have both the DVD and Network Install CDs which imho is more useful, both of these likely work but since none of the limits of the previous is clearly stated I don't really see why one would go there if one didn't knew that was what one wanted. I have no real need for all the packages on the installation media and if I'm going to burn a CD anyway given a choice about network installer only or installer with a live copy of the OS I may pick the later because that give me a functioning machine now (and the number of MBs downloaded is close to completely irrelevant to me.)

Here the live CDs clearly state they are installed as is and can't be upgraded:
http://software.opensuse.org/1...
And that the DVD and Network mediums are suitable for installation.

Robyn doesn't look like a "he" to me.

It's not just about the install image, it's actually about building useful stuff into each product (and also allowing the same things to be configured in different ways in the different products, which is another part of why they can't just be package sets). For instance, the 'role' management for Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... .

That's what the *live* installer does - because that's all a live installer can do, really, unless you make a live image with a DVD-size package repository, which not many people really seem to want.

The *non live* installer still lets you choose the deployed package set.

The three product approach isn't simply about the deployed package set, though. It involves really rather a lot more than that. Hard to go into details in a Slashdot comment, but see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... .

Correction: there are quite a lot of web hosting companies which will lease you a physical host or VM with Fedora installed on it. Attempting to run any sort of serious production infrastructure on a distribution with an extremely short support life cycle is usually a bad idea.

(philip.paradis posting AC from this workstation, as I don't log in on it)

Finding "systemctl -xb" you just realise that there actually is something neat about the system being able to understand it's own logs. Finding out that your system is failing to boot because of one directory permission (/var to the wrong user) and that it doesn't start a shell at all or anything you can debug with is just disappointing.

I guess you mean "journalctl -xb". Even so, I had an issue with a mount failing (not a critical one), and systemd dropped me into a what it called a root shell. (See #733232 for a similar situation). Of course, then the system was practically fully up, so the shell was fully functional. However, I refuse to believe that systemd can't start a shell to debug. It might not do so by default, but it can. See http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Debugging/ (and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Systemd_early_debug_shell for what I presume is an older guide).

Looking at this page with Seamonkey has so much fail. Text blocks overlapping other text blocks, and the body text is a fixed-width item, so when your default font size is large or you zoom your browser, it gets a horizontal scroll bar. Seriously, fixed-width layouts should die. Also, why is "newer thread" on the left, and "older thread" on the right, and not the other way around?

https://lists.stg.fedoraprojec...

Really, all I wanted is for messages from people with mailers that didn't understand the concept of keeping e-mail to 80 columns or less (I think Outlook has been a major offender) not to be a mile wide because of how pre tags don't wrap long lines. I didn't want all this web 2.0 crap.

I completely agree that the mail archives UI is awful. Mailman2 archives could use many improvements (nicer thread browsing including cross-month threads, _optional_ threads collapsing, web-form replies, fulltext search, ...) but I don't really follow the direction in which HyperKitty is going - views like https://lists.stg.fedoraprojec... are a complete mess; having a one-mail per line concise view had great value...

It's still beta, I'm not hopeless; I think HyperKitty could be made much more usable by a few simple UI tweaks (and hopefully things like comment voting are optional). Perhaps we will get / can make a "classic theme". :-)

I tried the Fedora installation and after 3 clicks I already a Server Error (HTTP 500) on this page: https://lists.stg.fedoraprojec...

(No, I won't post a ticket. I have more interesting things to do today)

Me either. But that's what the manual says.

Lucid Lynx...2010. Hmm.

The Fedora docs from that same period are these:

http://docs.fedoraproject.org/...

Which tells you to use system-config-samba, which is the standard GUI Samba configuration tool, not a third party "hack". You can still do it manually, but you don't have to.