Slashdot Mirror


Fedora Core 2 Schedule Up

An anonymous reader writes "The Fedora website has posted a schedule for their second release. " Now that the 2.6 Kernel is out, I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon.

224 comments

  1. Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedora by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 5, Interesting

    enters freeze. then we can get a system that uses all the features of 2.6 to their max.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  2. 2.6.0 RPMs are already out by The+One+KEA · · Score: 5, Informative

    Arjan van der Ven has a directory here which has RedHat RPMs available for 2.6 and all of the userspace components needed to run it properly.

    --
    SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
    1. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those RPMs have been pretty much obsoleted since 2.6 is in rawhide.

    2. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's already available on the testing channel for Fedora. If you have the updates-testing in your yum configuration, you can update to 2.6 with a yum update.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    3. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot seems to hit very hard on redhat's ftp server at this moment...

      BTW arent these Arjanv RPMS exactly the same ones from rawhide ? He is in charge of redhat kernels, isnt ?

    4. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

      I replaced my config file with the freshrpms, probably should have saved it, but didn't. Would you mind pasting the updates-testing so that other fools like myself could try?

      Thanks

      --
      Can I get an eye poke?
      Dog House Forum
    5. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by BJH · · Score: 1

      Well, I've got updates-testing in my yum.conf:

      [updates-testing]
      name=Fedora Core $releasever - $basearch - Unreleased Updates
      baseurl=http://fedora.redhat.com/updates/ testing/f edora-core-$releasever
      gpgcheck=1

      And I don't get 2.6 - are you sure you're not pulling it in from somewhere else?

    6. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [updates-testing]
      name=Fedora Core $releasever - $basearch - Unreleased Updates
      baseurl=http://fedora.redhat.com/updates/ testing/f edora-core-$releasever

    7. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by rgmoore · · Score: 2, Informative

      My mistake. It's not under updates/testing. It's under development. Also, FWIW, I found that I just got a 404 if I tried using the addresses in the original yum.conf. I got much better results when I updated mine to include (for updates-testing as an example):

      baseurl=http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/ fedora/linux/core/updates/testing/$releasever/$bas earch

      I'm not 100% certain that the equivalent directory for development (which would be /pub/fedora/linux/core/development/$basearch) is a valid yum channel, but it ought to work if you want to keep on the bleeding edge of things. That looks to be roughly the Fedora equivalent of Rawhide, with newer goodies. It does include kernel-2.6.0-0.1.14.i686.rpm.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    8. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by BJH · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I got that 404 this morning, but a second try a few minutes later worked OK. Methinks a RH staff member was shifting stuff around before he realized what he was doing.

    9. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      If you try opening the directory that you get from yum.conf in a browser, it takes you to the directory that I described. I'm not sure why they've done things that way, but I found that I got better results if I rewrote my yum.conf to use the re-directed directory. That, at least, always seems to exist.

      I also checked, and you can add the Development directory to your yum.conf and download the latest, greatest, least stable stuff onto your computer. I added:

      [fedora-development] name=Fedora Development Packages (Development) baseurl=http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedo ra/linux/core/development/$basearch gpgcheck=1

      to my yum.conf and it gave me the option of updating to 2.6.0.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    10. Re:2.6.0 RPMs are already out by BJH · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that, I'll give it a try.

  3. Sounds like folks are already..... by tcopeland · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...having good experiences with the current Fedora release. Good to see this working out.

    1. Re:Sounds like folks are already..... by TrekCycling · · Score: 1

      I use it as my home OS now and it's awesome. Great experiences here. For sure.

    2. Re:Sounds like folks are already..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure is a good thing that page is SSL encrypted. I wouldn't want anyone to know I'm browsing about Linux, or Redhat linux specifically.

  4. Mmmmm by friendofafriend · · Score: 4, Funny
    This page last modified at: 2003/12/12 18:05:01

    Nothing new here, please move along.

  5. if only i could code... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if i had any clue at all how to do these kind of things, i'd love to see:

    1) Fedora Live! (with preferences from flash pen);
    2) Easily, optionally install 1) on a harddrive;
    3) Make an alternate version of 1) based on the tips/howto's at Planet CCRMA for multimedia/musicians's applications.

    With kernel 2.6 coming, it would be so sweet if there was some kind of way to walk up to a machine and just make it a DAW using nothing more than a CDROM and a flash pen, just overrwrite whatever is on the HD.

    Big problem is the CDROM, HD and sound optimizations, I guess.

    But you know, this is just a dream...I think Fedora Core 1 is great, a lot of fun, and the HOWTOs/FAQs have made the little issues on the distro disappear really easy.

    I'd say Fedora is going to continue to be a great success.

  6. Updates: Yes; Default: No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Updates will be out, yes, but most distributions have already had 2.6 updates available as a "No, it's not ready yet, but here you go."

    Remember how fun 2.4 was when it first came out?

    Yeah.

    1. Re:Updates: Yes; Default: No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2.6 will be the default in Fedora Core 2. Red Hat has been preparing for it for a long time, AFAIK they're the only distro that ships fully a NPTL enabled distro, which is cruical for 2.6.

    2. Re:Updates: Yes; Default: No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah! I remember how fun it was when 1.0 came along!

  7. Boot CD's with 2.6? by bstadil · · Score: 1
    I was trying to find a BootCD with 2.6 but Knoppix, Moppix, and MandrakeMove does not seem to have it yet.

    I tried to edit the Knoppix ISO here a few weeks ago but it didn't work.

    Suggestions please!

    --
    Help fight continental drift.
    1. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be patient? 2.6 only came out a few hours ago. Why would you expect BootCD's to have the kernel already?

    2. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by grahamdrew · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are some experimental Gentoo LiveCDs for x86 using the 2.6 test kernels at http://gentoo.oregonstate.edu/experimental/x86/liv ecd/

      Not too useful if you're trying to run off the CD, but not bad if you want to test 2.6 compatability or need a rescue CD.

      --
      // Dumps core here
    3. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by oscarcar · · Score: 1

      Well, because the pre-2.6 kernels have been out for awhile. But I think the reason is probably because 2.6 doesn't quite support as much hardware as 2.4 yet. And ppl expect Knoppix to just work, so I'm figuring that's why.

    4. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by AlXtreme · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's Morphix damnit, next thing they'll be calling it Muppix and expecting green frogs jumping around...

      Anyway, main reason is that cloop needs to be ported to 2.6 and everyone's too lazy to do it. Klaus is busy as hell, and everyone else is waiting for Klaus :-)

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    5. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Well, if they based it on Suse (caps?) they could at least have that green little thingie jumpin around...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    6. Re:Boot CD's with 2.6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes, Klaus (the same S. Klaus?) has lots to do next five days :)

  8. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    screen resolution? I want that...where do I get it?

  9. Hopefully Not by Joel+Carr · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Personally I hope other distros don't change their release schedules around the new kernel. I think it would be foolish for a distro to release a product running on 2.6.0 as default. Best to stick with the 2.4.x series and have the 2.6.x series available as an unsupported extra to avoid any nasty surprises.

    Hence if the next release of a distro was to be built on 2.4.x with 2.6 development kernel included, there is likely no need for a change in release schedule.

    ---

    --
    Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. -- AE
    1. Re:Hopefully Not by GrenDel+Fuego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fedora is basically Redhat's testbed for new technology, so it makes perfect sense for them to push out 2.6 this quickly.

    2. Re:Hopefully Not by Joel+Carr · · Score: 1

      Yes I agree, but in relation to the comment:
      I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon
      I still hope not.

      ---

      --
      Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves. -- AE
    3. Re:Hopefully Not by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Informative

      it is a test bed, but it is not rawhide. it is a normal user distrobution. everything is stable and works well. the test bed is just a place for issues to be workedout on system design.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    4. Re:Hopefully Not by Alan+Cox · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is plenty of time between now and when FC2 is released for that kernel to stabilize further and old drivers get tidied up (if anyone actually uses them any more). The core stuff is looking very solid and passes test suites that killed early 2.4.x

    5. Re:Hopefully Not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      yeah, and linus asked them to do a 2.6 release to get the bug reports in.

      redhat does and continues to do the favor of putting out the latest tech in a supported release first. it's not always bug free, but it's not completely unusable.

      the list:

      glibc
      pam
      Xfree86 4
      gcc 3
      kernel2.6
      selinux
      xft

      Who else can say that? and debian doesn't really release their stuff until it's completely old.

      for those that look torwards the future, rh is very accomadating... and their stable releases (now their EL line) benafits...

    6. Re:Hopefully Not by wsloand · · Score: 1

      One of the major reasons I (and many other people) use Linux is because of its support for older and slower hardware. I can run Linux my 486 with two 10Mbit ISA nics as a home router and everything is hunky-dory. I, for one, hope that they keep the older drivers going for as long as possible. It'd be nice if someone could just provide a wrapper to keep old drivers working after they're no longer supported.

    7. Re:Hopefully Not by beef3k · · Score: 1

      Actually 2.6 is a prerequisite for releasing Core 2

  10. whats the schedual for 2.7? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    we have had 2.6 for a number of hours now, its time to move on... whats the schedual for 2.7 or 2.8?

    1. Re:whats the schedual for 2.7? by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      well Linus no longer maintains the stable kernel, so give him a few months and I bet it starts in the summer.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  11. 2.6.0 experiences by xchino · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know alot of this was mentioned last night when the story of the kernel release came out, but I thought I'd mention it anyways.

    There are two new interfaces to configuring the kernel. xconfig (based on QT) and gconfig, as well as the old menuconfig. I only tried xconfig and menuconfig, but they both worked fine and more quickly than their predecessors.

    When compiling your kernel, drop the make dep and make clean and just #make bzImage modules modules_install. It might just be my imagination, but it seems like it took half the time to compile 2.6.0 and modules as it did for 2.4.23-pre6 which I was using.

    If you get an error message like QM_MODULES: Function not implemented you haven't gotten the module-init-tools for 2.6.0 installed.

    Nvidia users need to patch the nvidia-kernel sources with the appropriate diff from http://www.minion.de and apply before installing your new nvidia.o. My install went like this (Gentoo 1.4):
    1. Get the nvidia-kernel package
    #emerge -f nvidia-kernel
    (if it's not already is /usr/portage/distfile)
    2. Extract nvidia-kernel
    #sh NVIDIA-Linux-...-pk0 --extract-only
    3. Patch driver
    #cd usr/src/nv
    #patch -p1 NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
    #ln -s Makefile.kbuild Makefile
    #make install

    Hope this helps someone out there, I spent an hour or two googling to figure this out, so I hope I can save someone the trouble :)

    --
    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
    1. Re:2.6.0 experiences by The+Analog+Kid · · Score: 5, Informative

      If your using Gentoo, then just emerge nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx, and portage will autodetect you running the 2.6 kernel and automatically patch it for you.

    2. Re:2.6.0 experiences by _generica · · Score: 1

      When compiling your kernel, drop the make dep and make clean and just #make bzImage modules modules_install.

      No need for 'make bzImage modules'
      simple 'make' will do the two automatically in a single run

      much better

    3. Re:2.6.0 experiences by xchino · · Score: 1

      I sync every night a 3:30am CST, and last night this did not work for me. I'm not sure what caused it not to work, as everything was fetched and installed okay, yet x would not run using the nvida driver, only using nv.o would work. Upon examination it appeared not to have applied the patch. This may be due to a problem elsewhere in my configuration, but I suspect if it is, then someone else may have the same problem,

      --
      Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
    4. Re:2.6.0 experiences by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

      Or just get yourself a slightly older Radeon chipset (9200 or older) and use the free software DRI drivers.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    5. Re:2.6.0 experiences by Aliencow · · Score: 0

      Same problem for me.

    6. Re:2.6.0 experiences by tunah · · Score: 1

      > #patch -p1 NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
      That should be:
      #patch -p1 < NVIDIA_Kernel-1.0.4496-2.6.diff
      Hurrah slashcode ;-)

      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
  12. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by pavon · · Score: 1

    FYI - several of the thumbnails down towards the bottom of the page don't match the screen screenshot they link to.

  13. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by (H)elix1 · · Score: 1

    Which thinkpad are you installing on, btw?

  14. WTF? Fedora Schedule? Windows XP SP 2 Changelist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Stop that. Now. Or I'll post my New Year's decision list.

    You have been warned.

  15. Debian Press Release by SparkMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    In response to the recent release of kernel 2.6.0, Debian is accelerating their development cycle and plans to immediately release a stable distribution containing the new kernel. Look for this new version sometime in 2005.


    (actually I'm a big fan of Debian but they gotta do something about their 2-year release cycles)

    --

    -- laws are the opinions of politicians --

    1. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're joking, but I'd be willing to bet good money that Debian will not have a stable distro with 2.6 out in 2004.

    2. Re:Debian Press Release by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      why? windows can get away with 2 years...and they are getting away with 5 years now.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    3. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      New project motto.

      Debian..... yesturday's technology today.

    4. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Debian... because things were better back then.

      It's the Linux version of those 10 CD "Best Hits of the 70's" that they're pushing on the TV shopping channels.

    5. Re:Debian Press Release by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      (actually I'm a big fan of Debian but they gotta do something about their 2-year release cycles)

      Why? I'm 2.4.something on two boxes here at home. Both are Debian testing (one should have been stable, but I forgot when setting up /etc/apt/sources.list). If it does what you want, why upgrade?

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    6. Re:Debian Press Release by SparkMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll tell you why.

      Because I love and use Debian, but contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business. So, I have to use the stable build, which has many good qualities, but as others have noted... kernel 2.2 as the default kernel?!? X Window System is a P.I.T.A. for anybody but an X god and forget about detecting my Radeon. GCC in stable is so old that there are ANSI compatibility problems. etc. etc. And no, package pinning does NOT solve any of this.

      I absolutely despise Windows, but at least I can run recent compilers on Windows 98 without having to compile the compilers myself. At least the latest games still work.

      I'm not merely complaining idly. If I could pay $50 for a stable version of Debian that worked right, had reasonably modern versions of everything, and was still idealistically free, I'd be first in line with my checkbook.

      --

      -- laws are the opinions of politicians --

    7. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trouble is, Debian isn't cutting it these days. Buy a recent machine, the standard office kit hardware wise. Debian stable will not install on a modern machine, it simply can't figure out many pieces of the hardware. On my machine it can't even find the HD and the installer crashes and burns, since it doesn't support the IDE chipset on the southbridge! It's the Intel i865 chipset, and this is the most common chipset being pumped out by the millions each day.

      Debian will not support this machine or the millions like it next month, or three months from now...

    8. Re:Debian Press Release by synq · · Score: 1

      I just compiled the 2.6.0 kernel on my Woody system running on an centaurhauls processor (VIA C3) and it runs with no problems at all!

      I even get the feeling it is faster (but perception helps a lot).

      --
      sig not found
    9. Re:Debian Press Release by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      If that's the case, it's pretty damning. One thing I can't understand is why they went with 2.2 for the installer instead of 2.4 (and yes, there are workarounds that are a PITA).

      I'd like the totally, 100% absolutely, positively free Linux (with apt:) but without the baggage that goes along with trying to keep seventyeleven architectures up and running.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    10. Re:Debian Press Release by ninjaz · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Debian Planet has a news article pointing to an in-progress OSNews series of reviews: http://debianplanet.org/node.php?id=1025 It focuses on the different Debian-based distributions.

      I had the same problems with the 2-year release cycle. I'm convinced this is due to the core OS being held back from release while every random application with a critical bug is stabilized (the tail wagging the dog), and the apps should be decoupled a bit. That is, something like how FreeBSD does it with a solid core, and the add-ons in ports which is a separate tree.

      From the review linked above, Libranet looks like it would be the best option for my purposes (from a technical standpoint, anyway - it even has XFree86 4.3!). It's $64 for the "Home/Small Office" version.. It looks like there are some non-free components included, though.

    11. Re:Debian Press Release by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      Why on earth do you care what kernel the installer uses? You only have to run it once.

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    12. Re:Debian Press Release by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      I think you have the wrong idea about debian. Stable isn't about playing games, it's not about using for a business desktop. It's not even about development. It's about being very stable and very secure. It's the kind of distribution you want running your ISP's webservers. Everything else, other than stability and security, is irrelevant to stable. The only changes they make to it are bugfixes. If you want to run a 2.4 kernel with stable it's very easy - unpack the tarball, drop in your .config, do 'make-kpkg binary' and install the debs. No, that's not something every user can do, but debian-stable isn't really suitable for every user. Newbies have Mandrake or SuSE; businesses have RHEL (though I would take issue that testing is unusable for businesses given that testing is already as reliable as any other linux distribution[0] and is likely to become the new stable within months, unless you mean that because it lacks the security updates using it is a problem in terms of due diligence).

      If debian doesn't suit you there are plenty of other distributions to try. I, for one, am glad it doesn't try to please everyone; projects that try to do that generally end up as a mess that pleases no-one, whereas at least debian pleases three groups of users with stable, testing and unstable.

      [0] Maybe slackware has the edge.

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    13. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the installer has to support you hardware. If it doesn't detect your integrated/made-in-the-21st-century NIC, no FTP/NFS install is possible. If it doesn't detect your IDE chipset no install at all is possible.

    14. Re:Debian Press Release by rsax · · Score: 1
      Because I love and use Debian, but contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business. So, I have to use the stable build, which has many good qualities, but as others have noted... kernel 2.2 as the default kernel?!?

      Same here. I got tired of the ancient software in the stable versions of Debian and the constant "use backports from unstable or run testing" comments when this issue got raised. Since then I have switched to SuSE. I'm still getting used to it but I don't have any major complaints so far. If the Debian guys, as a collective, actually realise that this is a problem and atleast tried to address it then I would be right behind you with my cheque book. I want to run a stable version of an OS for my servers but I don't want server software from 2-3 years ago!

      (Score:*, NOT Flamebait, just realistic)

    15. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Debian is the wrong OS for you. Use Debian Stable if you want an OS that is incredibly secure and stable, but otherwise incredibly useless. Use Redhat Enterprise or Windows 2000 if you want to get any real work done.

    16. Re:Debian Press Release by Mwongozi · · Score: 1
      look for this new version sometime in 2005.

      That's still before Longhorn. :P

    17. Re:Debian Press Release by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Unstable, I assume, is unready for serious business. Testing...it really depends on what your serious business is. I probably wouldn't want to use it as a 24/7 system (though that *does* depend on the downside risk...my system is effectively up 24 hours a day for 7 days a week, but I take it down every once in awhile).

      OTOH, if it's a server box sitting in a back room, what's wrong with stable?

      With testing, if you want a stable system, then disable all upgrades except for security patches. Then you have a stable system (as in it doesn't change much). Only run the services you need. Then you (almost certainly) have a system that's stable as in doesn't crash.

      If you have some special need that this doesn't cover, then fine. But for over 90% of "serious business use" this would suffice. (Statistics invented ad hoc on the basis of "seems like it to me".) I will grant that there are needs that this doesn't cover. But I have no idea what they are, as I've never happened to encounter them.

      I suppose that part of the problem is that I don't know what you mean by "serious business use". It's plenty good for many serious businesses to use in many roles, so this isn't what you mean. So you mean something else, but I don't know what. Terrabyte databases? Possibly... but there are also other possibilities.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Trouble is, Debian isn't cutting it these days.

      Thats putting it mildly. Debian is a fucking joke.

    19. Re:Debian Press Release by HiThere · · Score: 1

      There are a few non-free components included. But they can be removed if you choose to do so.

      The non-free components are the "Adminmenu" utility, and a few icons and splash screens. (And a Debian dist-upgrade has been know to remove the Adminmenu without people intending it to..though that's never happened to me.)

      Here's my quick check for the packages involved:

      $ dpkg -l | grep Libranet
      ii adminmenu 0.7.37-1 Libranet Adminmenu
      ii gdm-theme-libr 2.8.1-1 Libranet GDM login themes
      ii libranet-confi 2.8.1-1 Libranet specific configuration files
      ii libranet-sessi 2.8.1-1 Libranet session scripts
      ii welcome 2.8-1 Libranet welcome screen

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    20. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See Debian is losing mojo so fast it can't even hold up against any other distros anymore...

      Now it's reduced to comparing itself to windows..

      "Hey, guys, we're still better than windows! Sure we're the most antiquated distro around but like windbloze suxorz!"

    21. Re:Debian Press Release by treke · · Score: 1

      workarounds like typing in bf24 at the boot prompt? The stock debian stable images ship with 2.4.18 on them.

    22. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ya if you want to reminisce about the wild boom days of the late 90s install Debian. You'll have all that great old, buggy, unuserfriendly, doesn't support any hardware, pain in the ass days of Linux...

    23. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, am glad it doesn't try to please everyone;

      Doesn't try to please everyone?! It supports ELEVEN architectures HALF of which are OBSOLETE FLEA MARKET MATERIAL.

      It's about being very stable and very secure

      Then WHY does it have OLD VERSIONS filled with THE BUGS OF YESTERYEAR that have been fixed many times over in the MOST RECENT VERSION of a peice of software?!

      MORE secure?! When you have to WAIT for some COLLEGE KID to BACKPORT THE FIX to the OBSOLETE version of the software that Debian USES?!

      GET REAL!

    24. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod Parent Up - Very Insightful

    25. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha! yea even typing "bf24" is now classified as a pita.

      rotflmao.

      debian is the last one around the block to be sure, but many are not that far out ahead.

      and for servers, what are the other options?

      not gentoo.
      not fedora.
      not suse.
      not mandrake.

      besides debian...the only two others that i'd consider for general purpose server are: slackware and freebsd.

      everything else is for bleeding edge desktop use, hobbyist, funins around...

    26. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like the totally, 100% absolutely, positively free Linux (with apt:) but without the baggage that goes along with trying to keep seventyeleven architectures up and running.

      What you want is FreeBSD :)

      I recently switched from Debian testing/unstable to FreeBSD 4.9. I'm running all the latest versions of everything I need, and of course it's as stable and fast (if not faster) than Linux was/is for me. Plus - I don't need to wait ages for some software to come in (seems like ports get updated quickly and maybe it's easier to make a port than a whole set of Debian packages?)

      I use the portupgrade utility just like I used apt-get. I spent much time evaluating other Linux distros but I simply could not find anything Debian-like enough except for FreeBSD. Gentoo looked okay but FreeBSD is more stable, so much more mature, and importantly much less MANUAL than Gentoo's compile-everything, no-installer, no-binary-distrib approach.

      Really dude, FreeBSD is for you. Documentation is great, you shouldn't have much trouble coming from Linux.

      I hope you can read this anonymous posting because I have had such a +ve FreeBSD experience thus far :)

    27. Re:Debian Press Release by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting

      contrary to what the Debian fanatics will tell you, the testing/unstable versions are unusable for serious business.

      Maybe I'm one of the aforementioned fanatics, but I've been using unstable for serious software development for about two years now. There are only two "problems" I have with it, and neither of them has anything to do with reliability. For that matter, neither of them has anything to do with Debian, per se, they're problems that arise from being "non-standard".

      The first problem is package formats. Most commercial software comes packaged for Red Hat and only for Red Hat. Alien, which is a utility that repackages .rpm files as .debs, works 90% of the time, but the other 10% can be a huge pain. For example, I was doing some embedded development about a year ago, using the MontaVista distribution (which provides a Linux kernel and libraries for the target platform, plus cross-compilation development tools). Alien didn't work. Luckily, I noticed that one of the MontaVista developers is also a Debian developer and I e-mailed him (I'd love to give him a public plug here, but I don't recall his name). He was very helpful and told me how to tell the Debian installation of rpm to create the needed database and even gave me a little .rpm file that faked the needed dependencies. Not ideal, since I now have two package management systems on my machine, neither of which knows about the other, but it works. I recently installed DB/2 by just using rpm directly.

      The second problem is that, contrary to what people usually think when Debian is brought up, my software is often too new. Unstable nearly always has the latest released versions of everything, and even a few late pre-releases. Particularly since Debian unstable moved to glibc 2.3, I've found that a lot of binary-only software that was compiled against older libs doesn't run right. For example, DB/2 comes with a little graphical installer written in Java, and the installation CDs include a JVM that is used to run it. The included JVM segfaults on my box, and the installer didn't seem to like running in a Sun 1.4.1 JVM. No big deal, though, because the non-GUI installer is a shell script that invokes rpm, and it worked fine.

      So, IMO, if you're willing to accept being a second-class citizen because you're not using "the" commercial distro, Debian unstable is a fantastic platform for desktop use and software development. Debian stable is great for servers. Testing is sometimes the best of all worlds, but is a bit dangerous since it doesn't always get security patches very quickly.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    28. Re:Debian Press Release by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In response to the recent release of kernel 2.6.0, Debian is accelerating their development cycle and plans to immediately release a stable distribution containing the new kernel. Look for this new version sometime in 2005.

      Actually, 2005 is about right.

      What just released is 2.6.0. Looking at the past history of kernel releases -- or even just reading the comments of kernel developers about this release -- you'd have to be an absolute fool to put this on an an important production server now.

      It's important to understand the Linux kernel release cycle. When Linus cuts loose a "stable" release, that does not mean that it's stable in the sense of "reliable", it means it's stable in the sense that developers aren't going to be hacking the guts apart (well, excepting the 2.4 VM thing, which actually supports my point). There are going to be problems for a while, and that's just part of the process.

      Nope, if your workload is important, you'll want to wait a few minor versions. From what I read on LKML, the developers think that 2.6 will stabilize a lot faster than 2.4 did, because 2.6.0 is a lot more solid that 2.4.0 was, but you still probably shouldn't even think about it for serious production work until at least 2.6.5, and even then you'd better test the crap out of it (never a bad idea anyway).

      So, figure that about six months from now, 2.6 will be solid enough to be the default kernel in less conservative distributions. At that point, Debian will be watching how well everyone else fares with it. A year or so later, they'll have some confidence that it's trustworthy. The next release after that, it will probably be the default. In the meantime, 2.6 will probably be available in woody fairly soon, and is already available in sarge, though it's very unlikely to be the default when sarge is released.

      Meanwhile, one of my Debian unstable boxes is happily running a Debian-provided 2.6 and has been for a couple of months now.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    29. Re:Debian Press Release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Particularly since Debian unstable moved to glibc 2.3, I've found that a lot of binary-only software that was compiled against older libs doesn't run right.

      Use LD_ASSUME_KERNEL to temporarily disable NPTL.

    30. Re:Debian Press Release by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      Hm, fair enough about the NIC. I thought IDE was pretty standard and backward-compatible though?

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    31. Re:Debian Press Release by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

      Wow. The first TIME I've been REPLIED TO by Zippy! YOW!
      You have to wait for some college kid to make the fix in the first place; Debian generally applies that pretty quickly to the version in stable, or provides a workaround while they produce an update. Plus, the version in stable has had a lot more hammering. All the easy-to-find bugs have been found.
      Although the newer versions have had the old bugs fixed they may well have introduced new, less well understood bugs.
      If you think it's a good security strategy to run the latest versions of mission-critical software on the basis that old bugs have been fixed without considering the possibility that new ones have been introduced, I pray you are never responsible for adminning any boxes I depend on.
      The updates to stable take place in a very predictable way: an update to a package in stable will never require installation of new dependency package (something that does occasionally happen in other distros - and is clearly a poor security policy).
      Anyway, that's why there are different distributions. You keep ruunning your mission-critical apps on gentoo[0], I'll keep mine on a debian/stable box thanks. We'll see who has more problems....

      [0] or Fedora, or whatever.

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    32. Re:Debian Press Release by SparkMan · · Score: 1

      I really think Debian needs something inbetween the "somewhat obsolete but rock solid" Stable archive and the "frequently being upgraded and broken" Testing archive.

      You know, a "reliable and secure enough for normal people to use but not embarassingly old" Normal archive. The kind of archive that could incorporate every new release of the 2.4 kernel as it's default kernel but that would not jump right on 2.6.0 because it's too new.

      It's not that Debian isn't trying to do releases, it's just that every release cycle takes 8 months to settle down once they start trying. Dependency problems maybe?

      --

      -- laws are the opinions of politicians --

    33. Re:Debian Press Release by swillden · · Score: 1

      I'll give that a try. Thanks for the tip.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    34. Re:Debian Press Release by swillden · · Score: 1

      the "frequently being upgraded and broken" Testing archive

      Your experience is different from mine. I don't find that testing or even unstable are frequently broken, although they are frequently upgraded. In the last three years my systems have been broken, briefly, exactly two times. In both cases, it was easy to simply revert the broken packages, and fixed versions were available in less than 24 hours.

      What I think would work really well is an apt-get option that will only install packages that are at least n days old, excepting security updates. When serious problems occur, they get fixed quickly, so bad packages never live very long. Given that feature, I think just about anyone could run unstable with confidence. Initial setup and configuration would still be a chore, but there are other project addressing that issue.

      I actually wouldn't recommend that anyone run testing because, as I mentioned, it often doesn't get security fixes.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    35. Re:Debian Press Release by CentrX · · Score: 1

      Testing is very nearly comparable in stability to the stable branch, and is equal to or exceeds the stability of many other distributions. That is not really the problem with using testing.

      The problem with testing is that the Debian Security Team does not specifically provide security updates for it. Thus, if a package in testing has a security issue, the fix for that security issue will not be in testing until the normal, automatic, procedure for transferring packages from unstable to testing takes place. This means that a security bug in testing will be fixed 2 days after the fix is released for stable (and put into unstable), at the very least. In some cases, it may take weeks.

      So, while the stability of testing shouldn't be a real concern for most businesses, its security is. Thus, a business must be more active in order to maintain the security of a system running testing.

      --

      "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
    36. Re:Debian Press Release by CentrX · · Score: 1

      Woody does have binary images of the 2.4 kernel. 2.4 simply isn't the default.

      --

      "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
    37. Re:Debian Press Release by CentrX · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that the testing archive has ever been broken (in its 2? year history?), possibly but once. Before packages are part of testing, they stay in the unstable branch for a variable amount of time and are not moved to testing until a package has no so-called "release-critical" bugs. Thus, testing packages usually fit very well with the rest of the system, and there are not really any problems. In terms of stability, testing is in many ways comparable to the released versionso f many other distributions. Testing is perfect for normal people who want to use something reliable that's not embarassingly old. The only problem with testing is security updates: it doesn't have any. This is a concern for many people, but not as much of one for the home user.

      You may be thinking of the unstable branch as "frequently being upgraded and broken". This is sometimes the case. Sometimes, packages are uploaded to unstable that significantly break the system. Clearly, this is undesirable for the "normal person". Although, I should mention that if you do not upgrade an otherwise stable snapshot of the unstable distribution, then there really aren't any problems.

      --

      "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson
  16. Multiple monitors without restarting X by propellor_head · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the website:
    ...there is one new function in Gnome which I hope makes it to the final release due sometime in November 2003. It's the ability to change your X screen resolution without having to restart X
    Does anyone know if there will be a feature that allows you to enable another monitor via Xinerema without having to restart X?
    1. Re:Multiple monitors without restarting X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, you still have to restart X if you want to enable a second monitor,

      what the new feature does add is the ability to change screen resolution and monitor size (for example change from 1024x768 to 1600x1200) on the fly without restarting X

      cheers

      anyweb
      http://linux-noob.com

  17. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Exiler · · Score: 1

    Please, PLEASE don't ask for that... Everytime I have to update glibc I end up breaking my whole system. =P

    --
    Banaaaana!
  18. Re:Uh that's not a troll that's the truth, I dont by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    parent is correct, here is the docs, read the section about their bf2.4 flavor kernel.

    Debian Docs

    `bf2.4'
    This is an experimental flavor which uses a special version of the kernel-image-2.4 package. It provides support for newer hardware components which is absent in the other (more stable) flavors. It supports more USB hardware, USB keyboards/mice, modern IDE controllers, some new network cards, and Ext3 and Reiser file systems. Compared to the driver set of our main kernel-image-2.4.x-yz packages, some non-essential drivers have been removed in order to keep the number of needed floppy disks in a sane range. If you have unexplainable problems with kernel 2.4, you should use other flavors. If you need more new drivers or optimisations for your CPU type, feel free to install an "official" kernel-image-2.4.x-yz package. This flavor comes with one rescue floppy, one root and four driver floppies.
  19. Positive so far on Fedora by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There have been complaints about the stability of some Fedora 1 components but by and large I commend RedHat for further freeing their user-oriented distro by unencumbering the copyright issues that caused PinkTie etc to spring forth.

    I think /. should replace the RedHat logo since there is a clear distinction between the Fedora product and RedHat's primary branded offering, and this would also recognize the community of non-RedHat employees contributing to Fedora.

    1. Re:Positive so far on Fedora by TrekCycling · · Score: 1

      You mean the logo in the menu? Where else is there a logo? I agree, though? Fedora is an awesome product and a positive, not a negative move.

    2. Re:Positive so far on Fedora by hlee · · Score: 1

      Yeah, flip the hat logo upside down to its "open" stance.

  20. Cmdr Tick-Oh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Now that the 2.6 Kernel is out, I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon."

    Why do you care? You're a schill for Steve Jobs now.

  21. Updates Soon? by sflory · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There will be unofficial updates for testing, but the big boys will holding off for months. Doesn't anyone remember the pain and suffering of 2.4.0-2.4.12? Linus and co ripped out, and replaced the vm code twice in the 2.4.0 to 2.4.11 time frame.

    Red Hat didn't release a 2.4 kernel untill 2.4.7, and pretty much everyone considered it broken. Sure gentoo and the rest of the bleeding edge are already running 2.6.

    --
    IANALBIPOOGL (I am not a Lawyer, but I play one on GrokLaw.)
    1. Re:Updates Soon? by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      But don't forget that what Fedora is for. To be the bleeding edge, the cannon fodder for Enterprise. However, I welcome the chance to be Fedora cannon fodder. Hmmmm ... 2.6.

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    2. Re:Updates Soon? by 1lus10n · · Score: 1

      here goes my karma ......

      Gentoo is a Linux from Scratch based distro, as such it is what you make of it. I know quite a few people who are running gentoo who have no intention of upgrading to 2.6 until at least the majority of reports confirm that shit is for the most part working.

      --
      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." --Albert Einstein
    3. Re:Updates Soon? by graf0z · · Score: 1
      Linus and co ripped out [...] i think they've learned their lesson and try everything to avoid that pain. 2.6 will probably stabalize much faster than 2.4 (see also Alan Cox' post).

      /graf0z.

  22. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 4, Informative

    umm, if it is part of the next version, when you apt-get upgrade, or yum update, you should have a fedora 2 system working fine.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  23. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

    Um, you realise you can do this is Fedora Core 1 right? I have the applet right here - you could do it in red hat 9 too if you used the command line ;)

  24. we love bill gates?!?! by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 2, Funny

    fedora screenshot from Fedora 2 Test Screenshots.

    I must care more about my eyes...

    --
    #
    #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
    #
    1. Re:we love bill gates?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      here are the Yarrow screenshots

      http://www.dark-hill.co.uk/yarrow/index.html

      THAT is the correct link ^^

      cheers
      anyweb
      http://linux-noob.com

  25. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The biggest glibc change is moving to the NPTL threading system. Red Hat has already done so with Fedora 1, now it'll be interesting to see if and how other distros manage to take advantage of all the testing done by RH. Also, you can be quite sure any further changes needed for Fedora 2 will be made in time to glibc, as Red Hat is the defacto primary developer of said system these days.

  26. i agree by HelloKitty · · Score: 1

    i agree.

    I'd love to have a distro tuned for audio...

    though I'd rather have normal distros tuned for audio (i.e. the low latency patch, alsa, a few apps like rosegarden, ardour, audacity, csound, a few others...)

    at least we now don't have to install Alsa ourselves. :D

    1. Re:i agree by cyb97 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is this really where linux is going, one distro for this kind of utilities and one distro for security, another for network-chores and this one for mailservers etc.

      I know you can't win them all, aren't there enough distroes out there. What the world needs now is more people contributing to the existing projects rather than people forking new projects.

      I'd rather see 10 new RedHat/Debian/Whatever developers than 10 new distroes specializing in their own thing. Why not create the necessary packages for a smashing audio-distro and submit them to your favourite distro ?

    2. Re:i agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well I really didn't mind having to re-install Alsa for every 2.4.x kernel upgrade. It really wasn't that hard or that time-consuming, especially when I got a faster box.

    3. Re:i agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      that's what Planet CCRMA is...audio, musician, 3d applications for RedHat distros. HOWTO's and rpms. They recently started supporting Fedora.

      Unfortunately this stuff is in extreme flux at this point...a lot of is is pulled from CVS and even massaged by the CCRMA group at Stanford.

      It would take hours upon hours for Joe User to do this kind of thing, if not days, if even reasonable...and they are not going to do it if they are a musician and not a Linux geek...this is really a different situation from the usual mail, web server, security, etc stuff that a admin really needs to know, in a way it's like clustering or rendering, a special use--and these applications are getting their own distros pretty fast.

      Another big different is a cluster or render farm guy is probably already a hardcore computer geek--whereas this is much less likely the case for a musician.

      A Musician's distro is probably coming in the near future for these reasons. Might as well be Fedora, if so, and be Knoppix like :-)

    4. Re:i agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, if the world needs a firewall distro (as they do) then there'll be a firewall distro. If they need a desktop distro without server stuff then that will exist. If they want a spreadsheet they can probably get one packaged for their current distro. If they want a low-latency kernel then that'll be another distro again.

      Generally, there's as much fragmentation is as useful. I don't see many distros that obviously should exist.

    5. Re:i agree by swillden · · Score: 1

      Is this really where linux is going, one distro for this kind of utilities and one distro for security, another for network-chores and this one for mailservers etc.

      Yeah, that is a problem. Hey... I know!!! Why don't you make your own distro that covers all of the bases, and then convince everyone to use it! That'll fix it for sure!

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:i agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you think that forks do contribute to the original distro?

      If somebody forked out a fedora-based distro to create a audio-based distro:

      1. if they did a good job, you reintigrate it back into fedora, thus improving life for everybody.

      2. If they did a crappy job, then only people that care would be screwed over instead of all fedora users.

      Now what if they contributed directly into the fedora project.

      1. they do good job. Everyone benifits.

      2. they do a bad job. Makes fixing it a pain and makes fedora look bad while making linux difficult, because you have to fix the problems as a user.

  27. What is NPTL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously. I recently switched to Fedora and am wondering what the heck that NPTL label is on the kernel in Grub.

    1. Re:What is NPTL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the Native POSIX Thread Library, it's basically a new threading system. Scales better and so on, very slick. It's quite a fundamental change that touches many other core software in some way or another.

  28. Funny name.. core by cyb97 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The word core makes me instantly think of core-dumps... Kind of like if Microsoft named their next Windows version "Microsoft BlueScreen"

    1. Re:Funny name.. core by CMonk · · Score: 1

      I thought the same thing which is why it was so funny to see this.

      http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux /

      Notice the icon used for the "core" directory listing (by accident I'm sure).

    2. Re:Funny name.. core by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      "The word core makes me instantly think of core-dumps"

      Well then you may be interested in the actual origin of the term core dump. Waaaaay back when, RAM was just a big box with cris-crossing wires strung through washer-shaped magnets. The charges in the wires would cause the magnets to physically flip over when you set the 'bits'. This was called 'core memory'. And no, I'm not that old, it's what my professor told me.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    3. Re:Funny name.. core by NateTech · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not that old either, but I have a piece of core memory lying around here somewhere that someone gave to me and I also can Google, and I can assure you - the ferrite donuts (cores) don't move.

      I think this calls for a plonk! and an STFW.

      It's electromagnetic changes, silly -- just like today's RAM, only much much much bigger and with stranger problems. (Like core heating due to the resistance of the wires and other fun stuff.)

      --
      +++OK ATH
    4. Re:Funny name.. core by Etcetera · · Score: 1


      Apache 2 displays that icon for any file named just "core" when FancyIndexing, or Icon Indexing, or something like it, is turned on.

  29. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by koekepeer · · Score: 2, Informative

    nice way to increase karma, very professional

    especially the MOD THIS UP part is hilarious. slaughter.edu... very funny.

    this guy is a very impolite, crap-posting troll

    check his recent posts (especially the insults written in CAPS). i don't care if this costs me (offtopic, troll, whatever) karma, please mod parent according to his behaviour.

  30. Hold the phone... by jargoone · · Score: 1
    Now that the 2.6 Kernel is out, I imagine all the major distributions will have updates relatively soon...

    ... which will sit on the shelves if anyone is smart. Linus himself has said he'd wait until an update. No point in rushing. The kernel isn't going anywhere.

  31. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by baximus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Check out advanced Fedora 2 Test Screenshots for some great eye candy!

    If you actually look at the page, and look at the date at the bottom - Last update October 14th, 2003. - you'd realise that these are screenshots from Fedora Test 2, not Fedora 2 Test. That is, it's the second Test release prior to Fedora Core 1.

  32. wrong by koekepeer · · Score: 1

    those are screenshots of the prereleases of fedora core 1

    just like the trollpost above... i wonder how much attention the moderators are spending on verification of the links.

    1. Re:wrong by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 1

      those are screenshots of the prereleases of fedora core 1
      just like the trollpost above... i wonder how much attention the moderators are spending on verification of the links.


      oops. sorry, I just wanted to share my shock with others when I saw on a linux screenshot a sentence (in capital letters) 'we love bill gates'....

      --
      #
      #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
      #
    2. Re:wrong by koekepeer · · Score: 1

      sorry, i was just so annoyed by the obvious troll from amsterdam vallon (at the moment at +4), who linked the same screenshots as you....

      i automatically assumed the worst about your post. my apologies.

  33. Re:Debian is Dying by eurleif · · Score: 1

    I know I shouldn't be replying to a troll, but here goes...

    First of all, Debian has the most out of date software packages of any major mainstream distros. Even in the unstable version, is KDE 2.2 and Gnome 2.0, with Xfree86 4.1 (A version that really sucks). There are literally years that pass between each update of Debian.

    My Debian Unstable with Gnome 2.4, KDE 3.1, and Xfree86 4.2 disagrees.

    Secondly, its a pain in the rear to set up, first of all, you are forced to use Kernel 2.2, which is horribly hacked with "backports" to get any use on any modern machine (Read, made after 1999). Good luck memorizing all the *.ko files in /lib/modules, as you are going to need it.

    My Debian system with 2.4.18 disagrees.

    Configuring XFree86 is a pain! If you don't have a Thick X11 orilley book, and a list of your horizontal sync values from your monitor's intruction manual (if you even have one), BOOM! There goes your monitor.

    I don't have an X11 book, but I do have my monitor's manual. And that worked.

    Even then, good luck getting anything over 640x480@16 colours.

    1280x1024 with 14 colors. Who needs more?

    The most common response to help questions on the Debian mailing list is "n00b, READ THE MANUAL, you idiot, go back to WINDOWS XP if you can't learn to use dselect", true too, search the archives if you think I'm lying. Other distros give you comprehensive PRINTED MANUALS, PHONE SUPPPORT and/or freindly forums where repling RTM gets you banned!

    But honestely, RTFMing is often the best thing to do. I've been told to RTFM a few times, and I'm glad of it too; I now know how to solve my own problems most of the time.

    Debians support for any decent hardware, including USB mice, scanners, Sound cards, heck even Serial devices struggle. If you can even get 80x25 text mode with PS/2 input devices you are really lucky.

    All of my hardware (including a USB keyboard, USB mouse, and HP Photosmart digital camera) works perfectly under Debian. Can't talk about any other hardware, of course.

    Apt-get has many flaws. First of all it uses a non standard package format (the rest of the world uses RPM, deprecate the DEB format!), has broken respetories, and out of date software to install. All this combined with the kludgey dselect user interface make package management a nightmare.

    Yes, most of the Linux distros are far behind Debian in using the RPM package format. DEBs are far better.

    So we have a few broken repositories, so the heck what? Don't use them.

    If you don't like dselect, use something else. Synaptic is quite nice.

  34. moderators: it's a TROLL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    look at the replies!!!

  35. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's interesting to see how Red Hat is contributing not only to glibc, but also playing the leading role in for example GCC development. It should give the RH bashers something to think about.

    Does Havoc work on the freedesktop.org effort on RH's paycheck? I'm guessing he is, but I'm not sure. RH has said they're pretty much not interested in the desktop at the moment, yet outside RH probably only Ximian/Novell can compete with the number of core GNOME developers under a single roof.

  36. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by AstroDrabb · · Score: 5, Informative

    I am using Fedora Core 1 now and find it very stable, fast and well put together. The only problem is that it is a little "bleeding" edge for 3rd party apps. My Netlock VPN client doesn't work with the stock FC1 kernel so I had to install a Red Hat 9 kernel. I cannot get the Corda graphing server to run, and various issues with the newer NPTL and glibc stuff that requires patches to get Oracle to run. Though with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 with similar packages, the 3rd party support should pick up soon. Overall it is a good desktop, especially with freshrpms.net to get tons of extra packages.

    --
    If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
    it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  37. I haven't even got there yet! by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

    Good grief - I've got boxen sitting all over round here - I've got a few SuSE desktops and several Mandrake servers (interesting problem in itself).

    Now I downloaded Fedora Core 1 the other day with the intention of trying it out on one of our desktop systems.

    Now another core is sceduled for April!

    I can't keep up with this - This must be my penance for all those times I complained when I was an MSCE that the updates were too few and far between.

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
    1. Re:I haven't even got there yet! by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      While they just anounced a specific schedule, the plan has always been to have very aggressive/short release cycles.

    2. Re:I haven't even got there yet! by reality-bytes · · Score: 1

      I know but I still can't keep up! :)

      --
      Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  38. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by T-Ranger · · Score: 4, Informative

    Uh, the whole point of Fedora Core 1 is that it is bleeding edge. If your want something that is stable, FC-1 isnt it.

  39. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea, verily, and with what, pray, tell, shall we gag thee, Valley Geek?

  40. Re:Debian is Dying by petabyte · · Score: 1

    Yes, most of the Linux distros are far behind Debian in using the RPM package format. DEBs are far better.

    Why? What makes a .deb so superior to .rpm or .tgz? Usually people argue dependencies but dependences aren't tracked by dpkg or rpm. apt-get can track them for both formats. And alien was able to convert rpms to debs or tar.gz's fine when I was running slink.

    There is nothing wrong with most package formats. It is how they are used that makes a difference.

  41. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah yes, with the new glibc we can use the linux kernel 2.6.0... TO THE MAX!!!

  42. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yes, I'm anticipating that the Natalie Portman Threading Library will be something very special.

  43. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

    you want to run oracle? you should be useing Redhat enterprise.

    --



    I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
  44. Re:because you are an assturd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    What other sorts of turds are you familiar with my good man?

  45. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should give the RH bashers something to think about.

    No, because Red Hat made a theme that looks the same on GNOME and KDE... and therefore made KDE inferior!! So they are evil and must die...nothing excuses this.

    Incidentally, if anyone has ever doubted what a bunch of whining children KDE developers are... take a look at the recent UserLinux fuss. UserLinux (a distro based on Debian and started by Bruce Perens) recently decided to focus its efforts entirely on GNOME for the desktop. When Lindows, Connectiva or SCO focussed exclusively on KDE, GNOME developers just took it in... and went on developing their desktop. When UserLinux chooses GNOME, the KDE developers go into the ultra-flamewar mode that we've all seen before when they don't get their way. Frankly, they are a disgrace to the Free Software community and should shut the hell up... anf preferably go away.

  46. Re:Debian is Dying by DA-MAN · · Score: 1

    I too have wondered this very point! You would think that a distro such as Debian would be attempting to get their ass on the lsb track if just for compatability. Oh well, guess they used it for far too long to make a change.

    --
    Can I get an eye poke?
    Dog House Forum
  47. Re:why is this important or newsworthy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Naaa if you want to be told what is important, NBC CBS ABC BBC NPR are elitist fucks that tell you what you should think. Fox at least tells the other side of the story. Now for honest, unbiased facts, just read Slashdot or Salon or Wired!

  48. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With, like, negative moderation spoons and space cadet moderators that don't know a joke when they see one, like, TOTALLY!

  49. True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may be a troll...but it's true!

    Debian is losing mojo fast.

    Everyone is jumping ship or getting ready to.

    Don't be the last one on the sinking Debian ship!

  50. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes the truth hurts.

    1. Re:LOL by eurleif · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, POSIX doesn't mention any package format. How are DEBs any less standards-compliant than RPMS?

      Can you name these security holes?

    2. Re:LOL by Jordi+Bunster · · Score: 1

      I don't think they mean POSIX, I think they mean LSB.

      --
      Jordi Bunster http://bunster.org/contact/
  51. Ships with SELinux? Check with your lawyers by semiwhore · · Score: 1

    Were the patent issues with SELinux ever resolved?

    http://slashdot.org/articles/02/07/27/0224224.sh tm l?tid=155
    http://slashdot.org/articles/02/07/27/0 224224.shtm l?tid=155

    I just glanced over SCC's Statement of Assurance, and it looks like it's void "...with respect to VPN gateways, perimeter and distributed firewalls, URL filtering, authentication and authorization for applications, hosts and devices, and other products..."

  52. Fedora makes Debian look like a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Debian has been a joke in the business community for a long time now but now even the geek community is jumping ship. Back 6 years ago I used to tolerate the constant political infighting and slow release schedule of Debian. But lately other distros have surpased Debian to such a degree that it makes debian look ridiculous and using Debian an excercise in masochism or stupidity. I don't know where Debian went wrong but its time to put the wooden stake into this blood-sucking monster once and for all. Debian is dead. It's time to move on.

    1. Re:Fedora makes Debian look like a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Bravo!!!! Bravo!!!!!! you should bow accordingly. What an excellent post. Mod this up!!!!! Excellent performance on your part.

    2. Re:Fedora makes Debian look like a joke by golgotha007 · · Score: 1

      reposting with some mod points because this message is dead accurate

      Debian has been a joke in the business community for a long time now but now even the geek community is jumping ship. Back 6 years ago I used to tolerate the constant political infighting and slow release schedule of Debian. But lately other distros have surpased Debian to such a degree that it makes debian look ridiculous and using Debian an excercise in masochism or stupidity.

  53. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you know how many YEARS it would take Debian to become standards compliant?! Approaching DECADES!

    So the ego maniac developers just say "Those standards are stupid and suxy anyways so we don't have to comply with them" ya so maybe Microsoft thinks the same thing? If the ENTIRE community has chosen a standard STICK TO IT.

    Debian refuses to come into standard compliance because they don't have the talent or the resource to ever pull it off. They can barely get a stable release out the door.

    Oh and .deb/apt-get system has serious security issues that will never be fixed since it would take to much time/talent so instead they will just ignore it.

    Face it everyone accept old farts are jumping ship for gentoo, fedora or some BSD. Debian is passe.

    Still I'll always fondly remember the 90s when Debian was king, those were the days, but the Linux game has changed a lot since the 90s. The pool of users has changed and people are more demanding today.

  54. Re:Debian is Dying by Jordi+Bunster · · Score: 1

    Why? What makes a .deb so superior to .rpm or .tgz?

    Well, not that I think it is enough to justify superiority, but .debs can be unpacked with tar, ar and gunzip (or is it uncompress?), whilst .rpms (supposedly, not sure here) need the RPM tools.

    --
    Jordi Bunster http://bunster.org/contact/
  55. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stable???? ROFLMAO If I see "Nautilus has encountered an error" one more flippin' time...

  56. What happens with "Export approval"? by Black+Art · · Score: 1

    I am interested to know what is happening with "Export Approval". Are they removing code to make BXA happy? Just what demands/changes/modifications are being made to "comply" with export controls?

    --
    "Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."
  57. Re:I'm New Here by chihowa · · Score: 1
    Wow, 52 comments. All almost the exact same thing. You've even managed to rack up some karma. That's pretty cool. Right on!

    Do you run a search for that phrase every so often, or just happen to notice it when it comes up?

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  58. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by jd142 · · Score: 1

    I believe the response was because the writer felt that the reasons given for not choosing KDE boiled down to FUD. Whether or not that is true is a different issue. The writer seemed to feel that in writing on why he did not choose KDE, Perens was not giving a reasonable picture of the KDE project. And also perhaps that if you choose one product over another, it is good to list the positive reasons for the chosen product instead of the reasons you didn't choose the competitor.

  59. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and hes a subscriber... odd.

  60. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by bogie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure you don't want to use it for a long term server, but plenty of people find Fedora stable enough for desktop use. Look at Mandrake, a lot of people use it and don't complain about stability even though they are notorious for being bleeding edge and doing things like ship RC packages.
    I don't think its either fair or accurate to just call Fedora unstable, because it isn't. A lot of really smart people put it together and test it and they don't go out of their way to just blindly ship the latest package X just because its out there. For all the talk of "Bleeding Edge" Fedora's bleeding edge is a lot less sharp then some people like to claim.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  61. Even RMS stopped using Debian like a year ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Face it, Debian is passed its prime.

    1. Re:Even RMS stopped using Debian like a year ago by eurleif · · Score: 1

      I don't care who is or isn't using Debian, I care that it works for me.

  62. Re:why is this important or newsworthy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed it is. At least is has XFree96 4.3.0 - like RedHat 9 did. Debian stable might include 4.3.0 by the time Longhorn is released.

    Fedora Core 1 is very polished - running for weeks now and not one single crash or hung application.

  63. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by rodgerd · · Score: 1

    Unless you ever, you know, compile your own software.

  64. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by clem · · Score: 2, Funny

    I tried it out and my whole system locked. It was as if it was petrified.

    --
    Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
  65. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Informative

    As I posted, in my experience FC1 is just as stable as Red Hat has been for me. I have not had any stability problems with it at all. The only problems I have ran into is with 3rd party applications that do not yet have support for the newer NPTL, glib or exec-shield.

    --
    If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
    it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  66. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1

    All of our production servers run Red Hat AS 2.1. My workstation is running FC1 right now and I needed the Oracle client installed to connect/work with the Oracle servers running under AS 2.1.

    --
    If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
    it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
  67. Re:Byteboyz only on Fedora by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, pad're, but Fedora is a byteboyz toyz only release. RedHats paying desktop lusrs are still orphaned.

  68. Re:I'm New Here by clem · · Score: 1

    Wow. One geek's legacy.

    --
    Your courageous and selfless spelling corrections have made me a better person.
  69. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by macemoneta · · Score: 2, Informative
    Sure you don't want to use it for a long term server

    Your mileage may vary, but I'm not having any problems with Fedora Core being used as a server. It's been running since the day it was first available for download, with zero downtime.

    --

    Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.

  70. hey it's true man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey face it man it's true.

    People have had enough of Debians shit.

  71. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

    same here:)

  72. Re:why is this important or newsworthy? by Wheaty18 · · Score: 1

    Is XFree96, like, '10 louder' than XFree86?

  73. Re:Debian is Dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > I know I shouldn't be replying to a troll, but here goes...My Xfree86 4.2 disagrees

    Are you the one trolling? Debian stable comes with XFree86 V3.3.6a. Just because you like Debian doesn't give you the right to troll and lie about it.

  74. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by root:DavidOgg · · Score: 1

    > If your want something that is stable, FC-1 isnt it.

    There's a ringing endorsement. :/

    Not that I'd switch from Gentoo anyway.

    --
    --AROS is an Open Source AmigaOS clone, and source compatible with AmigaOS! Try the x86 build at http://www.aros.org
  75. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by NateTech · · Score: 1

    Didn't you hear? Linux isn't ready for the desktop!

    Your server disto people say so!

    --
    +++OK ATH
  76. Migrating from RH to Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a recent interview, Bruce Perens mentioned quite a few reasons why Debian may be a much better option for former RH users than Fedora.

    We agree and we are migrating to Debian.

    1. Re:Migrating from RH to Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      I am glad I don't work for your company. To go from a distro like Red Hat to yesturday's Debian is absolutely foolish.

  77. PPC Release by darmou · · Score: 1

    I know there is a ppc dev version of Fedora, so why is there no release schedule for it?

    Daryl

    --
    -- remove NOSPAM for actual email address -- Things are not as square as they may seem
  78. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The biggest glibc change is moving to the NPTL threading system. Red Hat has already done so with Fedora 1 ...

    NPTL support was first included in Red Hat 8.

  79. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. It was Redhat 9.

  80. Re:Very Important -- Please Note.. (Time/Screensho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you check his journal. you'll see that someone gave it to him. a troll-fan. can you believe it...

  81. Red Hat 2.4 (Re:Updates Soon?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Red Hat started with 2.4.2-2 included in the released distribution, not 2.4.7, their 2.4.7 was pretty good (remember they were always using 2.4.*-ac*), and to this day RHAS uses 2.4.9-something. It's just version numbers aren't really the "vanilla" kernel numbers, they're rather losely connected :)

    Lam

  82. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "When UserLinux chooses GNOME, the KDE developers go into the ultra-flamewar mode"

    And quite rightfully, I'd add.

    If Lindows, Connectiva o SCO focussed on Gnome, the KDE team wouldn't have had *any* problem with it, since those are *private* corporations, just the same there's no problem with RH focusing on Gnome.

    But userlinux is said to be an *open* intent to reach the corporate boxes, and here all the fuss comes to... specially when Perens' reasons are quite ludicrous!

  83. Re:Debian is Dying by eurleif · · Score: 1

    I'm talking about Debian Unstable, as I said.

  84. Re:Lets hope the new glibc will be out before fedo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are you babbling about? What does "open" have to do with it? Should UserLinux supply every single desktop for Linux too?

    Perens' reasons where quite simple: Qt/KDE costs too much -- it loads huge costs on to the end desktop developer. GNOME and KDE are roughly equal in features (GNOME ahead in some places, KDE in others), but GNOME is significantly cheaper to develop for. All the unsupported claims about Qt lowering TCO and the GNOME bashing were totally unjustifed and childish... as most people already know KDE developers are a bunch of petty adolescent flamers (as a quick look through the history of KDE will show). Even without the huge savings, choosing GNOME would still be the right option, as the KDE developers' behaviour showed.

  85. Re:Debian is Dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, most of the Linux distros are far behind Debian in using the RPM package format. DEBs are far better.

    except that deb's are yet to integrate gpg signing ... trusty bunch of folks them Debian users >:)

    as for dependency tracking, that's long past the times of deb monopoly. give them credit for starting it and move on - or not, if you're the type that wants to go flying only in the Wrights' cart.

  86. Re:Debian is Dying by pyros · · Score: 1
    whilst .rpms (supposedly, not sure here) need the RPM tools.

    While I realise this is late, RPM files are just compressed cpio archives. It has been a few years, but when I was making custom RH CDs (you can probably check siglinux archives circa '97 to see me offering them) I was just using plain cpio tools to repacakge things.

  87. Debian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    "I can't keep up with this - This must be my penance for all those times I complained when I was an MSCE that the updates were too few and far between."

    Look on the bright side. If you were on Debian the releases would be every five years.
    Although you want to keep your boxes patched, no one says you have to upgrade everytime a release comes out