Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core 2 Test 2 Released
Kalak writes "Fedora Core 2 Test 2, part of the project's goal to 'work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software', has just been released - this test release 'is specifically designed for SELinux testing, as well as testing the 2.6 kernel, GNOME 2.5, and KDE 3.2.1.' Get a copy from one of the mirrors or grab a copy via BitTorrent. You probably want the binary only Torrent."
Not for production use. SELinux should create some fun errors.
Now we can use the lk 2.6 without having to add homebrew packages (yeah, I know there's some guy who provides a yum-able package tree). Anyway, this release should be an excellent updgrade. I'd be very interested to hear of the pre-release stability. Anyone care to comment?
I'm not horribly ign'nt, but I'm obviously no genious either. Somewhere along the line /dev got all dicked up and stuff stopped working. So to stop the bitching, it's great to see a faster-than-average turnaround by the Fedora guys. Will be installing this (and checking config files to see where I went wrong-- LEARN from your mistakes, people) tonight.
I hope their gonna switch to 2.6.4 cuz last time I checked, they were using 2.6.1 and acpi for that is still broken. For some reason, the acpi people don't even support 2.6.3 any more...
You mean "UnitedLinux" started by Caldera?
Is UnitedLinux still alive in a more than a symbolic way?
Pardon me, but isn't that what UnitedLinux was supposed to do?
look at the united linux page. looks very 'commercial' to me, you can't even find a download link easily, or can you even download it?
while the fedora page has a nice and simple download link.
Marge, get me your address book, 4 beers, and my conversation hat.
Except one of their members wants $699 per seat.
I think the correct question is what happened to United Linux... and I think we all know what happened there.
*SCO!* *cough* *cough* *SCO!*
So are you saying the previous distributions of linux weren't general purpose operating systems or that they weren't completely from open source software. Was say redhat 9 not general purpose??? Isn't FreeBSD general purpose and all open source??
What defines general purpose???
Evolution or ID?
Debian you were thinking of Debian
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
I installed Fedora Core 1 when it first came out and I was very impressed. It included some stuff that wasn't in RH9, including a very pretty graphical boot. If Fedora continues on the path that it is on now, it could become a worthy competitor with SuSE and Mandrake on the home user front.
The community projects like Fedora and Debian tend to innovate more than distros that are managed by companies because they can get away with the "if it breaks, you keep both pieces" warantee. Distros used in enterprise scenarios (generally) offer a more stable product, at the cost of innovation.
yup. from their faq:
What is UnitedLinux?
UnitedLinux is a standards-based, worldwide Linux solution targeted at the business user and developed by Conectiva, The SCO Group, SuSE, and Turbolinux.
and since Suse was bought by Novell, and United Linux was really 99% Suse...can we say "poof" UL is no more.
Is Fedora Core 2 going to re-enable MP3 support now that it's no longer a "commercial" product?
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
Maybe this is obvious -- I donno.
If you are interested Fedora, check out:
Fedora News
(unofficial site).
Lots of good stuff there.
As I type, one of my machines at home is downloading FC2 test 1. Guess I'd better check the timeline next time...
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
I notice they're still using gnome 2.5, not 2.6. I hope they get gnome 2.6 in by the test3 release.
http://github.com/gbook/nidb
They can't include MP3 support precisely because Fedora is non-commercial. (Who would pay the per-copy license fees?)
No, UnitedLinux was formed by Caldera, Connectiva,TurboLinux, and SuSE. SCO is obviously not an active contributor anymore, but Suse, TurboLinux, and Connectiva continue to distribute UL. UL is actually more of a brand that stands for packaging uniformity, since you download (or purchase) the UL version you want based on the vendor you choose. (i.e. You can get UL based on the SuSE, Turbo, or Connectiva dist. of Linux.)
Basically, the UL framework allows the companies to still market their product to corporations while still standardizing the Linux product and giving a (semi) unified front to the Linux world.
- Proofs of Sturgeon's Law Delivered Daily -
I got 2.6 working with Fedora 1 in about 45 minutes a couple weeks after it (lk 2.6) came out. I had no problems whatsoever, so I'm not sure what your problem was... I ran it that way for about 3 weeks with no hiccups and then switched back to the regular 2.4.x kernel so I could get hassle free updates...
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
Anybody else thought their email announcement is extremly hilarious? :)
x -faq-en/
One bug, two bugs, tar bugs, su bugs,
grep bugs, mew bugs, old bugs, new bugs.
This bug has a little hack,
This bug has a broken stack.
Say! What a lot of bugs to track.
Yes, some are in tar, and some in su.
Some are old. And some are new.
Some in sed, and some in jed.
And some are even in parted.
Why are they in parted, jed and sed?
I do not know. Bugs should be dead!
Some in jpeg, and some in TIFF
This TIFF one has an attached diff.
>From there to here, from here to there
Test release bugs are everywhere.
Fedora Core test 2 is available for
x86 and x86-64
It should not be installed where production is hot;
use it only for test, as we say quite a lot.
If you install with the default
SELinux will be the result
SELinux is a form of MAC
For more answers, check the FAQ [*]
By explicitly stating what apps can use
Unwanted accesses it will refuse
[*] http://people.redhat.com/kwade/fedora-docs/selinu
So please test test2 in this mode;
and please test it with your code.
Plus it comes with a new GNOME;
can you test that in your home?
Also X.org is new,
replacing XFree, test it too.
And 3.2.1 of KDE
We need to test, test, test, you see!
So we will test it on our box.
And we will even test out sox.
And we will test it in our house.
And we will test it with our mouse.
And we will test it here and there.
Say! We will test it ANYWHERE!
I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
It would appear to fill a void that IMHO exists between Debian and Slakware.
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
You insensitive clod.
But do we really need Yet Another Linux Distro?
As far as I can see, Debian, Gentoo, Slackware and probably others are already
Two of those distros are younger than RedHat (fedora).
Plus none of those offer SELinux out of the box (which FCTest2 does), none of those offer xorg instead of XFree86 (which FCTest2 does).
Seeing as Suse hasn't ceased to exist since Novell bought them, I don't think you can say UL doesn't exist.
/. readers can keep all these distros separate, but the business users out there (which really keep Linux alive) like to be able to see a strategy... some sign that your company is willing to work with other companies for the good of your customers.
TurboLinux is one of the most popular distros in Asia, and Suse is the most popular distro in Europe, in addition to being the #1 Linux distro on the mainframe platform.
I think if Red Hat really had the best interests of the Linux community in mind, they would have joined the UL project at the beginning, anyway, instead of trying to "go it alone" with their own marketing and distro environment. Then they start the Fedora project as yet another offshoot in a community that has lots of them already... when is it too much?
I mean, nerds like us
- Proofs of Sturgeon's Law Delivered Daily -
I had alot of problems, the graphic installer would not work for me, it would just lock my mouse up out of no where and I had to reboot. Once I got it installed I could not change my clock out of 24 hour format , the clock applet kept crashing. I tried to open hwbrowser to take a look into setting up my printer, that never loaded. The new nautilus is just garbage imho. I then tried to run yum but that failed as it couldnt reach any servers so I installed apt-get but I could not install any packages due to gpg issues. Sigh... core 1 runs fine on my laptop though.
How exactly is it crippled?
I was horribly disapointed with test 1, WOW , I mean I install it on release day and there are already like 500 megs of updates ?!?! , Not to mention all the menu issues and other buggies, I know its a "test" but wow RH betas were never in such disarray in my experience. On the other hand I was Thrilled with FC1 for my laptop, everything just Worked like it was supposed to I hope FC2 release is as good.
'work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software'
Wait a minute! Isn't Fedora directly derived from Redhat? And wasn't it Redhat who smugly proclaimed their superiority over certain other distros because they didn't use ANY proprietary software? Was Redhat lying to us?
No. I think it may make more sense to you if you put the emphasis in a different place:
'work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software'
In other words, it'll be just like Red Hat except they'll be working with the Linux community more.
bp
Most rpms built for RedHat 7.3 - 9 should work without a problem in FC1 and FC2. With Linux, you can easily build binarys that will only work on one version of one distro, it takes a little more work to make it generic.
How do I get my favorite package to be in the Fedora install? Personally I'd love to see better wireless support, maybe WLAN or HostAP.
and what exactly is preventing redhat from distributing NTFS like everyone else, commercial or not?
i've asked redhat repeatedly to explain, and they have refused to give a straight answer. first they claimed it was "stability issues", claiming NTFS would "corrupt memory", but wouldnt give any examples and clammed up when i asked for clarifications. then they suddenly changed their story to "legal issues", but again clammed up when asked to explain. patents? copyrights? trade secrets? no answer.
it ain't legal issues -- unless you can point to NTFS patents. and it ain't copyright issues either -- because the code was written from scratch. the codebase for NTFS was developed much the same way as the codebase for SAMBA -- from publically available documentation and reverse engineering. if redhat has a legal problem with NTFS then they shouldnt be distributing SAMBA either.
it also strikes me very odd that they would include FAT filesystems which DO have patent issues, but exclude NTFS which does NOT.
Because Redhat != Fedora.
Sunny Dubey
fedoraforum.org has a wealth of info in the FAQs and Forums.
For the newest issues, jump on IRC: irc.freenode.net #fedora
However, in looking through the messages, I found that there is a document on how to use mirror servers as a source for updates. I'm surprised that Fedora doesn't have a system for balancing clients to different mirror servers, a la Gentoo, but now that I've picked a few mirrors, things have been a lot smoother.
Your reality is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. - Baron Munchausen
This is a test of the distribution. This way, they get to test the ISOs, as well. You CAN apt-get upgrade or yum update your older release installation if you want to. Not everyone has an older installation and for those people, they'd rather download the new distribution rather than an old one and the upgrades.
Would've been logical if you thought it through.
It's in this new Fedora release, it's also in the Mandrake 10 "community" release (I just got my DVD last week) and it's in the upcoming Mandrake 9.1 release, which you can pre-order from Amazon even though you can't actually find it by searching in Amazon. Too many choices! Oh and OpenBSD 3.5 is coming, too.
Maybe they just don't want to pay to do all the due diligance required to make sure they are legally covered from Microsoft turning round and sueing.
;)
The stability problems related mostly to write support, you could read NTFS partitions ok, but the writing code was unusable for a long time. This isn't some secret conspiracy nobody will tell you about, it's just bloody complicated filesystem code, it's not easy at the best of times, and when you're reverse engineering something it's a whole bunch harder. Cut them some slack.
If you want to know why it's not suitable for shipping, maybe ask the people who make it, they will most likely be highly intimate with a) the quality and stability of the codebase, b) the legal implications of their work.
IANAL, so I pass on the FAT question, I had wondered that myself when the licensing was announced. I didn't read into it enough to see what was in/excluded though. Research is left as an exercise for the reader
Chris "Ng" Jones
cmsj@tenshu.net
www.tenshu.net
As for FAT, from what I've read the patent (patents?) doesn't cover the way Linux uses a FAT filesystem.
Damn my modpoints ran out just as i was reading the article =)
"think if Red Hat really had the best interests of the Linux community in mind, they would have joined the UL project at the beginning, anyway, instead of trying to "go it alone" with their own marketing and distro environment."
Do you think this has anything to do with it? A clip from a ZDnet Germany interview with Red Hat:
Were you asked to be part of the UnitedLinux team? Were there any negotiations?
We were asked to be a part of UnitedLinux team hours before their public announcement.
If Red Hat got together with mandrake, developed a standard that is 99% red hat, Calls SuSe the day before its released and says. Hurry up and be a standard, you have 9 hours! Think SuSe would do that?
-- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller