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."

Comments

I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[Kick the Donkey]

I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge, but isn't including GNOME 2.5 (a development version) a little, un-savery? I would imagine they'd want to wait for the first release of 2.6, and go with 2.4 till then.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[arendjr]

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.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[Ars-Fartsica]

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.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[MSG]

GNOME 2.6 is expected to be available before FC2's release. Including 2.5 now means they get more testing on the beta desktop before the final release, and as a result get a better final release.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[justsomebody]

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.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[Stonent1]

but isn't including GNOME 2.5 (a development version) a little, un-savery?

Actually Gnomes with a little butter, rosemary and garlic can be quite savory.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[nsxfreddy]

I'll wager Gentoo will have it first ;)

Yeah, but by the time you're done building it, FC2 will be released.

Re:I know Fedora is supposed to be bleeding edge

[Junta]

I think my system can beat the FC2 lag to build gnome.... now if we were talking about a KDE release..... That is an entirely different story....

Huge

[Anonymous Coward]

Fedora Core has expanded in this release to four binary ISO images...

Ugh. Looks like my modem will be getting a workout again soon. Wouldn't it be easier to skimp on some of the apps, and provide separate links to them so we can reduce download times? Four ISO discs is hella big.

Re:Huge

[theIG]

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

Re:Huge

[DAldredge]

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.

Re:Huge

[rodgster]

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.

Re:Huge

[shaitand]

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.

Re:Huge

[pyros]

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.

Re:Huge

[GerritHoll]

If you fetch almost everything from the internet, what's the point of downloading an iso at all? If your uplink is fast enough to do 'yum install ', I don't see why it isn't fast enough to perform 'minimal install' through FTP.

Re:Huge

[Alan Cox]

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

apt-get and yum?

[anthonyclark]

So how do I add a magic line to my sources.list or yum.conf to allow me to upgrade to this 'release'? Will upgrading be as easy as apt-get update; apt-get dist-upgrade ?

Re:apt-get and yum?

[maelstrom]

I'd imagine so, considering I just upgraded to Fedora Core 1 through apt from Redhat 7.3. I was pretty impressed it didn't break anything. Rebooted into the new kernel and everything.

Re:apt-get and yum?

[IpsissimusMarr]

Its discussed how to automatically update your fedora core through rpm on the fedora-test-list here. Hope that helps.

Re:apt-get and yum?

[tarm]

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.

Re:apt-get and yum?

[reaper20]

[development]
name=Fedora Core $releasever - Development Tree
baseurl=http://mirror.dulug.duke.edu/pub/fed ora/li nux/core/development

in /etc/yum.conf and then yum update. That worked for me. Look for "development" instead of "rawhide" on whichever mirror you use.

As always, there's no guarantee that any of that will work with test releases, although for FC1 I went from test1,2,3, and then to final using yum and had no issues.

Would it not be

[Anonymous Coward]

more prudent if slashdot made some kind of ticker on the website of software releases?

Re:Would it not be

[Stevyn]

A ticker for linux distros? Shit, that'd be longer than NYSE on the bloomberg channel. I just hope they don't also delay the "quote" 15 minutes or else we might miss one.

What about

[Anonymous Coward]

Mandrake 10.0 beta 2 is out also! Why no posting about that, hrmmm?

Re:What about

[Mateito]

> Mandrake 10.0 beta 2 is out also! Why no posting
> about that, hrmmm?

Because Mandrake, like BSD and Apple, is dying, and will continue to do so for the next 20 years. :)

Silly question

[baryon351]

Is there a version for PPC machines?

thanks

Re:Silly question

[teh*fink]

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.

Use a mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on editors. Why did you link directly to the full isos?!?!?! Use a mirror.

Re:Use a mirror

[Anonymous Coward]

What crack are you smoking?

Re:Use a mirror

[ticklemeozmo]

Why did you link directly to the full isos?!?!?!

Duh, so the part-timers who just happened to load the page before me can get the slow-ass version while the appropriately "hidden" mirror sites remain speedy and fast for me. :)

i386

[truthsearch]

Why is Fedora/Red Hat still compiled for i386? Can there be many 386 or 486 users? I would think it better to make it for Pentium I or II to get a nice performance gain while not abandoning many users. I realize they probably do it because Linux's oldest supported Intel chip is the 386, but it seems much more practical to compile higher. This was the reason I switched to Mandrake years ago, to try a distro compiled for Pentium.

Re:i386

[chez69]

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.

Re:i386

[zoloto]

the performance gain you get is almost nill.
I know because I've tried both.

Re:i386

[shaitand]

My system is 100% optimized for my athlonXP, yours can be too, just pick up a copy of gentoo and do a stage1 install.

Re:i386

[Spoke]

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.

Re:i386

[ctr2sprt]

I suspect the cause of your confusion is that many people insist on referring to Intel's 32-bit instruction set architecture by the name of the first processor to support it. The proper term is "IA32" (for "Intel Architecture, 32-bit").

My campaign for IA32 Awareness continues. If only I could persuade some actual developers to use the right term.

Re:i386

[Brandybuck]

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.

Re:i386

[0x0d0a]

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.

Re:i386

[y0bhgu0d]

...or you can install a pre-compiled OS and use those 3 days to actually be productive.

Re:i386

[pimpinmonk]

anthing else is a exercise in gentoo masterbation.

Dude my forearms are sooo optimized, -03 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -ffast-math -fexpensive-optimisations -fget-me-a-towel

Re:i386

[noselasd]

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.

bittorrenting now

[stephenb]

Please join me:

btdownloadcurses.py --max_upload_rate 350 \
--url http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/FC2-test1-binary-i38 6.torrent

Thank you, and goodnight! :)

Re:bittorrenting now

[computersareevil]

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!

fedora.org

[Hallow]

And since there was no link to the fedora website, I went to fedora.org. Whoops. Guess I'm gonna get fired (it's not a work friendly image, not nearly in goatse's league though). Apparently they forgot to register the names before they announced the project name.

Re:fedora.org

[InsaneCreator]

So, I can download THAT? It might take some time on dial-up, but what the heck...

Already using it

[ZuperDee]

I've been following its development by using Rawhide on my system. Yeah, call me crazy and stupid, but the reason I'm doing it is that I *MUST* use the kernel 2.6 now, since 2.4 does not support the onboard SATA controller on my VIA 8237 southbridge. (It'd be kind of a nuisance not being able to use my hard drive under Linux, you know.)

To me, the 2.6 kernel is really almost the ONLY reason to use FC2. Yeah, GNOME 2.5 might have some nice refinements over 2.4, but they're mere incremental improvements that for the most part, I don't even notice.

The 2.6 kernel also finally has ALSA support built-in, which is another good reason to go with FC2. I find it has *MUCH* better sound support as a result. (I could never get the stock OSS drivers working satisfactorily.)

Just my 2 cents, for what it's worth.

So, what you are saying is...

[al!ethel]

...this new test release will be the bee's knees? I have to really wonder why it is that the releases for Fedora are coming out so quickly? Most of the other distros that I have been using have had a fairly regular release schedule? I have not used Fedora yet, but I feel like I am being thrown a bone, in hopes of getting the new kernel tested and patched.

Re:So, what you are saying is...

[pyros]

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.

DAMMIT...

[JoeBaldwin]

Just after I switched to Knoppix.

And to be honest, I don't really want to switch back.

I had a load of fun and games trying to get Fedora to share my internet connection (coming in through one ethernet card) to the Windows XP computer in the other room used by my family (on the other one). Despite following a nice tutorial I found through Google, I couldn't get it to work.

Knoppix, on the other hand, stormed in and kicked the fuck out of Fedora, and with a few mouse clicks internet connection sharing was set up. A bit of wrangling with apt-get and one command in Konstruct and I had a full KDE 3.2 desktop set up and running. I'm using it now (very slick). It's the power of Debian with the simplicity of XP, and I wouldn't think twice about setting one of these up for a friend. It's just a perfect system.

Fedora seemed bent on making everything I need to do hard as hell and putting things out of the way. Most irritating was GDM, which decided that if I pressed Ctrl-Alt-Backspace I really didn't want to kill X so I could install the NVIDIA drivers, I just wanted X to restart. It shipped with a broken kudzu meaning that hardware detection didn't work properly...gah.

Just my two pence (for Brits) :)

Re:DAMMIT...

[IamTheRealMike]

Most irritating was GDM, which decided that if I pressed Ctrl-Alt-Backspace I really didn't want to kill X so I could install the NVIDIA drivers, I just wanted X to restart.

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.

There is a reason.

[ZuperDee]

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.

Some misconceptions

[Rascasse]

Fedora/RH compiles their distributions so that they only use i386 instructions. However, if I'm not mistaken the binaries are optimized for i686 class CPUs. In other words, the instructions are scheduled optimally for an i686 class CPU, but they only use i386 instructions. In fact, in some performance critical components, the binaries are both scheduled for i686 and use i686 instructions. One example of such a binary is glibc.

Net install?

[Cthefuture]

Does Fedora have a net installer?

You know, I small ISO that I can bootstrap the install from. That way I only download what I need.

Maybe I'm just too used to non-Red-Hat based distros but I rather prefer net installers.

Re:Net install?

[CMonk]

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.

They've released development stuff before

[October_30th]

Well, if I remember correctly Red Hat has a history of releasing distros with development versions of critical components.

The notorious gcc debacle with Red Hat 7.0 comes to mind...

Check the EULA carefully

[ahodgkinson]

And by the way, there's been a small change to the EULA, which means you have to register to download one copy for every single CPU that you plan to install it on! Don't worry, it's still free, you just have to (re-)regester each time. This is so that RedHat can keep it's statistics up to date. They claim that since it's a GNU license the download registration information will be placed in the public domain.

Also, download soon. Because the all the script kiddies planning to run Fedora based password crackers on their Beawolf clusters will be clogging the mirrors. :)

Did you read this far? Are you smiling at the joke? No? Sorry.. ah.. nevermind.. I guess I better get back to work before my boss catches me on /. again.

Re:Check the EULA carefully

[mahdi13]

CodeWeavers had a simular joke in their EULA for the CrossOver Plugin

YOU REALLY WANT TO READ THIS, ESPECIALLY THE PART ABOUT
YOUR FIRST BORN CHILD...

If you don't like this EULA:
a) Let us know, we'd appreciate the feedback.
b) Stop right now, and ask for a refund. We'll cheerfully do so.

Then at the very end

OKAY, WE WERE JUST KIDDING. THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE ABOUT
YOUR FIRST BORN CHILD. BUT YOU REALLY SHOULD READ THESE
THINGS, YOU KNOW.

Full EULA can be found here

Screw Fedora. Run Mandrake.

[waxmop]

Fedora is Red Hat minus the Red Hat corporate backing, which is really the main reason for using Red Hat. Mandrake has a better installer and urpmi has been used for years now. Mandrake is completely agnostic about which window manager you can use. The Mandrake Control Center rawks and covers 99% of the typical user's needs. And Mandrake has been down with BitTorrent since before it was cool.

Re:Hurry Up...

[0x0d0a]

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. :-)

DVD wish list

[heroine]

Someday some bright Indian is going to supply DVD's of this software so we don't need to keep swapping CD's.

Re:DVD wish list

[kluro]

DVD of all of the isos for i386 - Fedora Core 1
http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/Yarrow-i386-DVD.t orr ent

A total of 8 CDs?

[k98sven]

Ok.. can someone tell me why it's named "Core"?
To me, that seems to imply that it'd be a bare-bones system, like the kernel+GNU utilities..

This is obviously not the case.. but, seriously, why the name?

Re:A total of 8 CDs?

[n0dez]

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.

Re:A total of 8 CDs?

[Jokkey]

"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.)

Informative?

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on moderators, stay awake. Fedora doesn't even have a EULA.

Re:Restraining order on RedHat

[sabat]

This is funny enough, but what's important is that it rings true. We're moving away from RedHat, too, probably for the same reasons.

Why would I want to pay for Advanced Server (or whatever they're calling it this week)? Well, if I was running a complex app like Oracle or something, sure; it makes sense to get a highly stable, supported OS that's recommended by the app vendor.

But why would I want it for a DNS server, a webserver, an SMTP server, etc.? Other distributions (ahem, Debian, ahem, cough cough) are at least as stable, much more modular, and don't cost a cent because they're community-maintained.

"Core" my ass.

where is the minimal boot.iso?

[honold]

i see people mentioning booting off of 'boot.iso' and doing minimal ftp installs, but i don't see it on their ftp site.

Re:where is the minimal boot.iso?

[GerritHoll]

Just a random mirror: ftp://alviss.et.tudelft.nl/pub/fedora/core/test/1. 90/i386/os/images/boot.iso

So it's in /fedora/core/test/1.90/i386/os/images/boot.iso

(Waiting till his own ISP has it so he can download it from a computer only 1 hop away ;-)

Re:What about java for browsers?

[hardave]

more Java software using gcj (Ant, Tomcat, Jakarta, Eclipse, but not Mozilla plugins, AWT, or Swing) From what I get from that statements is that the java programs that are opensource (Ant, Tomcat, Jakarta, Eclipse) are now being compiled using the GNU Java compiler (gcj). Where as things that there is no source for (Internal Sun JRE libraries) are provided as is. Also I'm not sure how you can have a problem setting up mozilla to use java.

cd /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
ln -s $JAVA_HOME/jre/plugin/$ARCH/$BROWSER/javaplugin_oj i.so

Restart Mozilla.

Fedora, public sentiment, and actual impression

[poopie]

I like many people here, felt that Redhat made a giant PR mistake (for the opensource commmunity which got Redhat where they are today) when it turned redhat into fedora. The perception was, "Redhat needs to make money, so we're only supporting the enterprise versions. You'll need to pay for our software. You'll need to pay for binary patches, and you'll need to pay for support. No more free lunch. See ya' later."

Okay, so... I got over that (sort of...) and tried a whole bunch of different distributions, including Fedora core 1.

What I found was that I really like the fedora model, and can see that with just a little more momentum, it could become something far better that the original free redhat releases ever were.

If you are like I was, and have sworn off redhat for hacking/non-work purposes for whatever ideological reasons, I urge you to read the unofficial Fedora FAQ and actually give it a try.

I have been quite impressed with Fedora and with yum for updates. Make sure to get a new yum.conf file from the unofficial faq site before you try to update your system -- redhat's patch sites are almost always flooded. Then try adding in some of the development channels and do "yum install $package1 $package2 $package3".Add yum to run from cron/as a daemon to update your system.

I just wish now that *someone* would release a version of fedora core that includes support for mp3 and various popular video formats so that it would make a usable desktop for most people out of the box. What's to stop someone from releasing ISOs of feature-overloaded-fedora that would include most of the stuff that the repositories are currently building to "fix" fedora?

But back on the topic -- Before you swear off Fedora, give it a try with an open mind.

Re:Fedora, public sentiment, and actual impression

[Blarfy_Snarflepoop]

From what I gather - With what you were talking about having movie players, mp3 support etc (There's alos previous post questioning what 'core' means):

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.

Re:Restraining order on RedHat

[Anonymous Coward]

Then you take things too personally and feel that people owe you somthing they don't

I am very happy with fedora and am more happy then I was with RHL before Fedora. I get the same updates I used to get, only this time its less of a black box and more of a community thing (and though its still not perfect its getting better)
and its free.

I dont have to install software (like the new GNOME) from scratch or wait a year for them to release a new version.

The whole process is somthing that anyone can join, or see what is going on inside. If a certian package is removed, or if I want to add a package, it is much easier now.

Yes, Fedora is a distribution for the USERS of RHL, and most of the serious ones that dont think Redhat owed us anything, are actally very happy!

Re:Shouldn't they fix Core 1 bugs first ?

[Lumpy]

how aboutr the show-stopper bugs from core 1 that hose most compaq laptops?

ATI mobility has goofy graphics on the installer that redhat9 doesnt have and no other distro has a problem with so it's a bug in fedora's installer.

the requirement to constantly tap the caps lock ket on many compaq laptops so you have keyboard and mouse for the installer also is not apparent in any other distro (except redhat9) or the problem that the installer just fails if you dont issue the allowcddma command on startup for most laptops in general...

fedora's installer is a gigantic mess and has forced many LUG's to put it in a not-reccomended list for newbies or even mid-level linux users.

these problems alone made corperate here issue a statement that fedora is not allowed due to instability (they ignore my comment that if fedora isn't allowed then why do we allow XP?)

my questions and bugzilla reports go unanswered and I had 3 laptops set aside for testing/ bug working for figureing it out and solving the problem... but no answers except for the " try the kludge/hacks we posted or buy different hardware" type of response...

I dont want it to be a kludge, I want to help get these problems with fedora fixed.

Re:SDL_mixer

[Chuck Bucket]

sorry to be a Gentoo fanboy, but if you had Gentoo, the command 'emerge sdl-mixer' would get and install it for you.

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.htm l
Description: Simple Direct Media Layer Mixer Library
License: GPL-2

Not sure...

[justMichael]

I just finished testing Fedora Core 1, RedHat EL WS 3 and Gentoo 1.4 as I am about to build a new server and am curious where I should go now that "RedHat" is defunct for the free stuff.

My results show that there was no significant difference between the 3 of them (No, I didn't do a stage 1, I did stage 3 and even that took longer than I wanted).

The interesting thing was that RHEL WS burned through the RAM and started swapping a LOT sooner than Fedora or Gentoo, I was able to apply 4 times the load before Fedora and Gentoo started swapping.

RHEL was slightly faster 1-1.5 transactions/sec. But as we know once your web server starts using the swap you might as well pull the plug.

Dsiclaimer: I should have tested Gentoo using a Stage 1 install and I may do that before I make a final decision.

The test consisted of a production environment as I would normally use, the load was applied using siege.

And to avoid the flames, if someone has tuning ideas for either Fedora or Gentoo for a general purpose (apache/php/db) box I'll be more than happy to listen.

Does ACPI power management work?

[cheezus]

The only reason I'm running xp on this laptop is so i can put it to sleep.

Re:Does ACPI power management work?

[stor]

The only reason I'm running xp on this laptop is so i can put it to sleep.

Hmm? I thought you'd be running xp on it so that you can launch your applications...

Otherwise, leave it off... problem solved! ;)

Cheers
Stor

Re:Fedora pronunciation

[jjohnson]

Like the synonym for hat. Feh-DOH-rah.

Fedore UML Server/Minimal Images Available

[william_lorenz]

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.

CmdrTaco's had enough of us?

[386spart]

Discuss this test release on fedora-test-list.
So we're not supposed to discuss it here? ;-)

Oh Christ Shut up already!

[bogie]

I am so sick of these Trollish "Dear Red Hat" letters that get modded up. Red Hat owes you NOTHING. The whole sense of entitlement among users that Red Hat HAS to provide a Free distro that's updated for years for Free is bullshit.

Red Hat still does make a quality Free distro that's updated for Free, its called Fedora. Don't like the fact that its only supported for like 9-12 months which is shorter than it used to be? Too freaking bad.

Enjoy your Debian but realize is no magic bullet either. Unless you hop on stable the day it comes out you face the same problem of having to upgrade you whole OS in a short timeframe. If you installed Woody today your going to be dropped or "burned" as you put it because the next Stable will be out soon and then the clock ticks till Woody isn't supported anymore.

Get over you angst against Red Hat. Want a good Free as in beer and Free as in GPl distro from Red Hat? Use Fedora. Want something else? Pay for it or build it yourself.

Re:What about java for browsers?

[geekschmoe]

for us j2ee/ant/tomcat guys, symlinking is almost as hard as calling System.out.println()!

if they really wanted to sell their product, they would ship it with auto-symlink support!

AMD64 Fedora

[kisak]

Anyone knows if the AMD64 version of Fedora will contain most of the same programs as these i386 iso's when it is released? (AMD64 Fedora is still beta it seems) or are there still significant amount of programs not ready for AMD64?

Thinking seriously about buying an opteron machine...

SELinux?

[PineHall]

Will this have the Security Enhanced Linux? RedHat is suppose to be moving in that direction

PLEASE RE-MOD PARENT

[ajs]

Please re-mod the parent as funny. It is most certainly not "informative". The word "joke" should have tipped off moderators. :-(

Re:Restraining order on RedHat

[ajs]

So, let me get this right... you were running some production systems on a consumer OS that you thought you could get away with paying $50 support for (when the vendor clearly said that you should move to their enterprise product for such support) and... when they said "look, this is really unsupported, 'cause that $50 barely pays for the coffee around here" you get upset? Red Hat provides amazingly good support for Fedora: paid developers; release engineers; security updates; download servers; etc. The only thing they don't provide is a guarantee of support.

I laugh when I hear people talking about switching to Debian. It's not like they provide better support than RHEL. Red Hat provided an excellent upgrade path from Red Hat Linux 1 all the way to the most recent releases of RHEL WS, AS, etc.

Where was the problem? If it was too much money, fine, you can't afford it, I understand. But, don't blame Red Hat for that. We all knew a long time ago that supporting hundreds of diverse projects loosely gathered together into an OS distribution was a mountain of work. No one is shocked here.

If anything, RH took the best road. They provide the business suit set with something they can pay for and they provide a high-quality free version that the community gets input on! I use Fedora every day, and it's a great system. The apt integration is perfect, the compatibility with Red Hat Linux is seemless and the software selection is unrivaled (though it tends to be slightly more conservative than Debian unstable and slightly less so than Debian stable (which always lags unstable by a year or more).

Re:Shouldn't they fix Core 1 bugs first ?

[forevermore]

Also there is very few rpms for Fedora at rpmfind.net

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..

Re:Fedora pronunciation

[trouser]

A fedora is a type of hat. Get it?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fedora

Re:SDL_mixer

[Pros_n_Cons]

yes and if you had fedora you'd type:
yum -y install SDL_sound-devel Which would fetch everything for you. No time compiling either. I love seeing an offtopic post that is also wrong get modded up makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

Re:Restraining order on RedHat

[lone_marauder]

It's nice to see you taking credit for Red Hat's success and I commend you for building my favorite distro.

If you mean me as in The Linux Community, then on all our behalf, you're welcome. In case you've forgotten, Red Hat did not write Linux.

If people like you are responsible for "getting red hat where they are" Then they wouldn't abandon you because you gave them money. But its obvious the product you pushed for at work was a free download and you didn't give red hat a f***ing thing now you are pissed they are giving you something back that has 2 months shorter release cycle. but has the added benifit of:

I gave Red Hat a couple of hundred RHN subscriptions, including all of my personal systems and the rest from among my employer and client base, all for doing what a Gentoo user does every time he installs a system (kludging packages together) and keeping an update server running.

1.) install everywhere and anywhere without problems or restrictions.

Except for the small matter of Fedora being a screaming train wreck.

2.) Have a chance to put your own packages in
3.) Decide the direction of your distro by having 1 on 50 discussions with the developers.
4.) No RHN to sign up for 'yum -y update'
5.) Set up your own local repositories.

A distro with a real package management system makes customization and maintenance a lot less of a problem.

I bought RHPW for $50 and will probably pay for updates the next 3 years ($60).

Actually, it's more like $90. After the discount. For a system whose concept Red Hat said was untenable a few weeks ago (desktop Linux). What will they say next week? Will it sound like "Guess what, you, your employer, and all your customers are fucked. Have a nice day."

The distro I spend 4 hours a day on is Fedora. Debian might be nice but I have used Red Hat for years and like it, so why switch?

Because Red Hat Linux doesn't exist anymore?

Re:Restraining order on RedHat

[Pros_n_Cons]

If you mean me as in The Linux Community, then on all our behalf, you're welcome. In case you've forgotten, Red Hat did not write Linux.

I'm aware Red Hat didn't write linux, but even you have to admit they blaze a few trails and lead in my areas. If you don't admit it that's fine too I will not list them.

I gave Red Hat a couple of hundred RHN subscriptions, including all of my personal systems and the rest from among my employer and client base, all for doing what a Gentoo user does every time he installs a system (kludging packages together) and keeping an update server running.

And you can not afford $10 extra per-box this year? RHPW is still $60 per year for updates and only $10 more for the box.

Except for the small matter of Fedora being a screaming train wreck.

Could you explain please? Personally I can see a few things that sucked, A few bugs, etc. The way I see fedora is the first release was kinda slammed together quickly "here it is!" but it really wasn't ready IMO. Documentation, Guidelines, Repositories. Nobody was ready for it so some snags ensued. And FC2 is going to have 2.6 kernel, apt-get and SElinux so I expect more snags here, But FC3? FC4? the biggest things we are likely to see is KDE/GNOME like things. Once the kernel and the Fedora project itself have Ironed out thier flaws I expect Fedora to be an excellent distro for a long time.

A distro with a real package management system makes customization and maintenance a lot less of a problem.

apt-get isn't a good package management system? Debian users would disagree. Take away apt from dpkg and what do you have? the same problem RPM does without yum, or apt-get. This is the part where I wonder if you've even tried Fedora.

Actually, it's more like $90. After the discount. For a system whose concept Red Hat said was untenable a few weeks ago (desktop Linux). What will they say next week? Will it sound like "Guess what, you, your employer, and all your customers are fucked. Have a nice day."

Nah more like $49.94
They said the "desktop was unatainable" wow I never got that memo, do you have a link? It looks like they're hiring desktop people to me http://www.redhat.com/about/careers/boston/
On the Desktop thing, if you honestly think our mothers, and local hardware store owners are just fine on KDE you're flat wrong, the Desktop is great for us, or secretarys people with some technical abilitys. But for your average gamer and solitare player? c'mon man..