Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core 2 test1 Released
GerritHoll writes "A test release of Fedora Core 2 is now
available
from Red Hat and at distinguished mirror sites near you, and is also
available in the torrent.
Fedora Core has expanded in this release to four binary ISO images
and four source ISO images.
This test release is specifically designed for testing the 2.6 kernel,
GNOME 2.5, and KDE 3.2. Please file bugs via
Bugzilla,
Product Fedora Core, Version test1,
Architecture i386 so that they are noticed and appropriately
classified. Discuss this test release on
fedora-test-list."
Probably GNOME 2.6 is expected to be out by the time the release their final version of Core 2. Then they'll be the first to have it.
This is just the first test release so you can assume that the next test release will likely merge with production GNOME, and the release of Core 2 certainly will.
you don't need to download all of the isos to install fedora. Probably the first two at the most. Just do a minimal install, and then use aptforrpm or yum to install all of the software you need from the internet. -kyle
Come on editors. Why did you link directly to the full isos?!?!?! Use a mirror.
If it is like Fedora Core 1 just download the first ISO and select the base install. The base install in Fedora Core 1 was just on the first cd. You can download the rpms for anything else you need later.
WTF is the matter with you? Please read what you just posted here. "HELLA"? Jesus... I'm trying really hard to get along with "BLOG"... but I won't put up with hella...
I installed it last night via ftp and the boot.iso
Nautilus crashes on logoff, and I seem to have some acpi issues on my laptop, but it looks really cool. A lot of New stuff and much better GUIs.
Just my 2 cents.
Who will guard the guards?
If you read the mailing lists, you'll realize that the parts that benefit (kernel, glibc, openssl) are compiled for i686.
anthing else is a exercise in gentoo masterbation.
PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
Release date of Gnome 2.6: march 8
Release date of FC2: april 6
so yes, Gnome will be 2.6, and I don't see a problem with test release of Linux using test release of Gnome, because in the end both will be final for release.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
The important parts of Fedora for which CPU-specific optimizations do make a difference are already offered in i686 versions. The most prominent examples are the kernel and the glibc libraries.
For the rest, I believe it was found that compiling general user-space applications for i686 makes only a miniscule difference, if any.
If it's like fedora 1 you need all the iso's. minimal install STILL requires like 30mbs off of disc 3. There is plenty of room for everything and then some on disc1 but due to poor structuring and layout of the cd's.
Its discussed how to automatically update your fedora core through rpm on the fedora-test-list here. Hope that helps.
"Engineers do the work of man, Physicists do the work of God"
the performance gain you get is almost nill.
I know because I've tried both.
The notorious gcc debacle with Red Hat 7.0 comes to mind...
The owls are not what they seem
My system is 100% optimized for my athlonXP, yours can be too, just pick up a copy of gentoo and do a stage1 install.
While Fedora still compiles with the i386 instruction set for maximum compatibility, they do optimize for the i686 cpus using the following compiler options: "-march=i386 -mcpu=i686".
I'd be interested to see if specifying -march=i586 resulted in any significant speed increase. I doubt it would be significant. For code which does appear to be sensitive to optimizations, they do provide -march=i686 compiled RPMs as well as i386, glibc is a good example, openssl is another.
If you want an OS totally optimized for your CPU, use Gentoo.
Of course, if you want, you can always recompile the SRPMs using the target of your choice as well.
Sure does. RH has had it as long as I can remember. If you install via floppy you'll need the second net.img (or something like that) as well. If you want to install via CD image they have boot.iso which is about 4MB, if I remember right, which has everything you need for a net or PCCard install.
Really? I just did a Personal Desktop install the other day and it only required discs 1 and 2, perhaps minimal isn't so minimal.
See this post for why it might not be that easy. Basically, if you upgrade to the test1 release now, you might not be able to then upgrade to -final later. See the whole thread for more information.
That said you probably can do it anyway.
You do realize that Fedora is *exactly* the same system that the regular Red Hat releases have been, ever since RHEL came out, and that the RH marketing people are simply trying to play off image ("Oh, you can use this *enterprise*-class Linux distro, or some thing that only techies that like trying out new stuff use"). If you can handle Red Hat 9, you can definitely deal with Fedora Core.
:-)
On the other hand unlike the final release of Fedora Core 2, this is a test release, and *is* intended for beta testing. If you don't want to beta test, don't install it.
May we never see th
If you want an OS totally optimized for your CPU, use Gentoo.
Or any other OS that allows you a complete source build, such as FreeBSD.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Then why is Gentoo so much faster for me than Mandrake or Red Hat on the same computer? And I don't just mean launch times or graphics drivers or a pre-emptive patch. I mean everything is faster. I've checked the kernel compile flags and other things and can only attribute the huge gain to being native compiled to my Pentium III.
Developers: We can use your help.
Come on moderators, stay awake. Fedora doesn't even have a EULA.
Oh, the Red Hat engineers aren't stupid.
The Pentium ran stuff compiled for the 386 rather slowly, and you could get significant performance improvements by using stuff targetting the 586.
The Pentium II did a much, much better job of running 386 code quickly, which is why folks mostly stopped worrying about doing processor-specific builds.
There are certain packages for which the processor type makes a significant difference. Red Hat builds multiple versions of those few -- the kernel, glibc, etc.
Furthermore, as others have pointed out, Red Hat already aligns the code for i686 by default. This is where most of the improvements come from.
If you're really curious, I have tried rebuilding most of Red Hat for a couple versions for the i686, just for the hell of it. One gets no noticeable improvements. It's really a waste of time to spend time building differently. There are a couple programs that use arch-specific assembly (SDL, for instance), but in general, very few software packages are faster when built specifically for a given processor.
May we never see th
...or you can install a pre-compiled OS and use those 3 days to actually be productive.
i see people mentioning booting off of 'boot.iso' and doing minimal ftp installs, but i don't see it on their ftp site.
The aggresive release schedule is one of the project goals to keep it current with OSS projects. Debian Unstable is updated rather frequently too, as is Mandrake Cooker, and Ark Dockyard, not sure if Suse has anything similar. The difference is that Fedora is actually a released distro, with official ISO images and everything. If you want a slower schedule and more tested software, you need to go to Red Hat Enterprise Linux. If you want a something that's updating daily, and don't care about and actual releases (ala Debian Unstable and friends) use Rawhide.
Um this is the correct behaviour in almost every circumstance. If you want to install the binary drivers you're supposed to drop to runlevel 3, this is even documented.
The alternative is that if the X server crashes, you get thrown to a blank text screen - I'd much rather be put back at the login screen. GDM is designed this way for good reasons, you know - in fact I think most display managers do this.
You're a coward with a bad ISP and bad bittorrent settings.
Seriously; if your not pegging your downstream pipe with even a slow upload, your settings must be wrong. I routinely peg my 1.5m downstream while uploading is restricted to 56k (of 128k available). Assuming of course there are enough other people in the bittorrent, and that you have opened up your firewall, and waited long enough for your information to propogate.
What a lot of people with hugely asymmetric links (like 1.5m/128k) don't realize is that if your upstream link is saturated, your downstream will go to near zilch. I suspect this is what's happening to you, coward. Set your upload limit (via --max_upload_rate) to about half your upstream capacity, and your problems will likely go away. (Again, make sure your firewall has the right holes poked in it.)
That is, as long as you dump that crappy ISP!
Well I think that they called it Fedora Core because it is/will be the core of RHEL. They test stuff on Fedora and later, when they think it is stable enough, they add it to RHEL.
"Fedora Core" distinguishes the current, core distribution from various add-ons and alternatives (Fedora Extras and Fedora Alternatives) and from software packages for older distributions (Fedora Legacy). See here.
(There don't seem to be any packages released yet under Fedora Extras and Fedora Alternatives, but there's no harm in planning ahead, I guess. Fedora Legacy is alive and active and has already released several updates for Red Hat 7.2/7.3/8.0.)
sorry to be a Gentoo fanboy, but if you had Gentoo, the command 'emerge sdl-mixer' would get and install it for you.
m l
regards,
CB
bash-2.05b# emerge -s sdl-mixer
Searching...
[ Results for search key : sdl-mixer ]
[ Applications found : 1 ]
* media-libs/sdl-mixer
Latest version available: 1.2.5-r1
Latest version installed: 1.2.5-r1
Size of downloaded files: 914 kB
Homepage: http://www.libsdl.org/projects/SDL_mixer/index.ht
Description: Simple Direct Media Layer Mixer Library
License: GPL-2
free ipod and free gmail!
Like the synonym for hat. Feh-DOH-rah.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
try yellowdog linux; it may not be entirely up to date but it's mostly there. i regularly rebuild fedora source rpms to use on my ppc linux box and they also have a 64-bit version for the g5 ready.
"I DARE you to make less sense!"
Somewhat unrelated but nonetheless on-topic with the Fedora release, Fedore Core 1 server/minimal UML images are available at http://myturl.com/000pz/ (Linux Users Group site) for public consumption. I'm going to try to wait until the official Fedora Core 2 (not a test Core 2 release as this is but rather the real thing) is available before making UML images for that, as well. But using this UML image provides a good way to test and play with Fedora without reinstalling your system, just so you can see how much you like it. More info on UML in general can be found a the User-Mode Linux website on SourceForge, of course.
DVD of all of the isos for i386 - Fedora Core 1t orr ent
http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/Yarrow-i386-DVD.
There was talk about there being 'core' and 'extras' - core would adhere to the "only Open source & free software with no patent issues" model, and 'extras' would be contributed stuff, like what freshrpms, and fedora.us do.
No sig for you.
Fedora kicks the shit out of debian anyday, anytime. Its useable, fun and runs fast unlike that piece of crap.
and guess what, the debian community sucks too. Fedora has a much nicer community.
Thinking seriously about buying an opteron machine...
--- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---
Will this have the Security Enhanced Linux? RedHat is suppose to be moving in that direction
Please re-mod the parent as funny. It is most certainly not "informative". The word "joke" should have tipped off moderators. :-(
And this is better than:
yum install sdl_mixer
How?
Fedora is compiled mostly with -march=i386 -mcpu=i686, except atleast glibc and the kernel which for one comtains lots of arch specific assembly so it makes sence to divide it up in more arch packages.
If you read the gcc manual, -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 optimizes for i686, but only uses the i386 instruction set.(Hint: there is _alot_ more to optimizing than the instruction set..)
Anyway there isn't that many speedy instruction present in i686, atleast not since gcc doesn't generate mmx or sse automatically.
And compiling only with -march=i686 throws of alot of e.g. pentium users.
The alternative is -march=i586 or -march=-i586 -mcpu=i686, the first usually gives worse performance on i686, the next have just about zero advantage over the current used flags..
If you are still unhappy, recompile the src.rpms yourself with arcane compiler flags.. And please, please benchmark the diffrence.
Try using: ATrpms or NewRPMs or FreshRPMs or Dag's
All friendly with apt and yum. It's rare that I don't find a package in one of these repositories..
Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
A fedora is a type of hat. Get it?
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fedora
Now wash your hands.
Fedora 1 minimal install needs Disc 1, most other stuff disc 1 and 2. I've not played with FC2 test1 enough yet to check.
In FC1 however you can end up needing disc3 if you select some other language support as disc3 has locale specific bits on it
Bill Nottingham claims that the Fedora 2.6 kernel is too big to fit on a floppy.