Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core 2 Review
An anonymous reader writes "Linuxlookup.com staff member Rich Hughes posted his thoughts on the latest Fedora release with this Core 2 Review. "Fedora Core 2 is the newest release from The Distro Formerly Known As RedHat. Updates include the 2.6 kernel, KDE 3.2, Gnome 2.6, X.org replacing Xfree86 and numerous package updates. Having played around with SuSE 9.1, Arch .6 and Slackware 9 with the 2.6 kernel, I was interested in seeing how the Fedora team did with this release.""
Fedora Core 2 Review
.6 and Slackware 9 with the 2.6 kernel, I was interested in seeing how the Fedora team did with this release.
Category
Linux Distributions (O/S)
Distribution name
Fedora
Version
Core 2
Manufacturer name
Fedora Project
Provided by
Fedora Project
Price
Free
Review by
Rich
Fedora Core 2 is the newest release from The Distro Formerly Known As RedHat. Updates include the 2.6 kernel, KDE 3.2, Gnome 2.6, X.org replacing Xfree86 and numerous package updates. Having played around with SuSE 9.1, Arch
Installation
Installation was a breeze. I like that Fedora provides the opportunity to test your discs. This is an idea Mandrake would be wise to copy. It is frustrating to get to disc 3 of an installation only to find that it didn't burn properly. I give the distribution credit for making this easy.
The install was fast. It installed 3.5 gigabytes in about 20 minutes. They myth that Linux is hard to install is not true for most modern distros. Hardware detection was great, my usb mouse and keyboard worked immediately. My onboard Nforce ethernet controller wasn't recognized like it was with SuSE, but I didn't expect it to be. My normal ethernet card was recognized and setup with no problem.
The System
My first impression was that it looks like RedHat 9. I don't care for the default icon set or the menu layout. The fonts look great, but that has become my expectation. There isn't a reason for ugly fonts anymore, so to trumpet the fact they look good feels silly. The panel is filled with Openoffice.org icons but missing a terminal icon. The boot splash screen is very attractive, if that is your thing.
The odd thing about Fedora is that it seems to be aimed at novice users but is inconsistent. We are given the choices Web Browser, Email, Music Player and Audio Player, but left with Kopete, Kget, Emacs and so forth. Either your user knows what Kopete is or they don't. If you are simplifying the menu, do it across the board or don't do it at all. This inconsistency extends to the system itself. It is pretty and newbie friendly at first, but if you need basic functionality such as mp3 playback you must hand edit the yum configuration file. Up2date freezes, but the command line program yum works well.
This leads me to my biggest problem with Fedora. On one hand, it is a great introduction to Linux. It installs easily, works well and is attractive. On the other hand, it plays right into the hands of Linux's biggest critics, which is the mistaken notion that it is unfinished and most things don't work. You are given a browser with no plugins, so if you jump online excitedly with your new system, there are a lot of things that won't work. You load your favorite mp3s, then find out you cannot play them. God forbid you have a dvd drive. You notice the red exclamation point telling you there are updates available, but up2date freezes leaving you unable to get them. I know there are fairly simple solutions to these complaints, but the fact remains that not everyone who tries Fedora will know how to do it. They will just feel disappointed by a system that lets them down, deciding that this Linux thing is not ready for prime time. A program that would set up unofficial repositories with a few clicks would take care of this, along with some prominent documentation telling you how to get the things you need. I could not find any real documentation at the Fedora site, except for RedHat 9. This may be due to my lack of time to search for it, but if it exists, it should be clear where it is at.
Despite my complaints, there are things I like. The system is very responsive. Programs load quickly. With the exception of up2date, Fedora is stable. The splash screens look great. The look and feel, while not my cup of tea, is consistent throughout the applications.
Package Management
This is a nightmare. Add/Remove Applications provides me with the original
Seems like there is still no safe solution for this bug.
Some people report that they lost all their data by installing it.
I really can't understand how they released it with such bug.
In my experience, Vaios are some of the best-supported mobile systems available for Linux. Even the funky dials, switches and displays are supported by the sonypi project. I suspect it's because Linux has had great success in the East, even prompting some vendors to ship dual-booting Windows/Linux laptops. It just makes sense for Sony to use hardware that won't cause headache for its users.
It's more or less the same. The X.org is just a branch of Xfree 4.4rc3 before the license change.
If you want bleeding edge try the freedesktop X Server.
I've upgraded to boxes so far, one from Fedora Core 1 and the other from Red Hat 9. Both have had issues.
On the RH9 -> FC2 upgrade (4-year-old Compaq Deskpro), there was an issue with the grub.conf file that prevented the system from booting. Fortunately, I had burned the rescue CD and was able to go in and fix it. Lesson learned: make sure you have a bootable disk available! This looked like a major issue at first glance, but turned out to be fairly minor.
On the FC1 -> FC2 upgrade (Dell Inspiron 5100), the actual upgrade went quite smoothly. However, I've been unable to build drivers for my Agere-based Proxim wireless card under the 2.6 kernel. After wrestling with it for several hours, I've decided to throw in the towel and buy a Prism-based card.
In both cases, I've seen an error message pop up when first logging in to an X session. It appears to be a remnant of the Xfree86 install that wasn't removed or completely replaced by the new X.org stuff.
In all, not too bad, but there's still room for improvement....
My impression overall was very good. I hadn't installed a desktop Linux distro in a year or so, and Fedora was light years ahead of what I expected.
Installation, printing, sound, video, network, mouse, all worked perfectly with no tweaking.
My digital camera would register as /dev/sda1 when I plug it in, though I have to mount it myself, and my webcam (Logitech QuickCam Messenger) doesn't work at all.
Installing Java and Flash wasn't hard, and Thunderbird / Firefox was trivial.
The desktop looks very nice, and shortcuts, panels, menus, preferences were all intuitive.
Utilities like the music player and CD ripper are well done.
Great work by the Gnome and Fedora teams!
Arch Linux. It's an i686, 2.6 kernel, devfs, KDE 3.2.2, GNOME 2.6 using binary distro (similar to Debian except even more lightweight and up-to-date).
I use it all the time. My primary machine is still Debian but all my other machines and servers are running Arch. It requires a bit more setup work than Debian.
I like it because it is extremely lightweight but has an excellent packaging system (pacman). The packaging system (and all those packages) are pretty much the only reason I've stuck with Debian all these years and Arch is the first to come along that comes close (Gentoo is OK, but compiling is a waste of time). Although it doesn't have anywhere near the number of packages as Debian, I can see it growing rapidly.
An example of the sane thinking behind Arch: There is no "/usr/doc" directory. I always use manpages or go online to find documentation. I've never understood why so many distros include all that documentation. I mean you rarely use it (mostly just for setup), why make it take up disk space? Everything is online nowadays and manpages are easy/handy.
Also, the install is fairly raw (which is a good thing). It just works and is simple. They need to fix some stuff with regards to swapfile setup (like if you don't want a swap partition) but otherwise it is fairly easy. You almost don't even need the installer (just the boot CD). Too many distros go off with their crazy complex and broken installers that end up leaving you frustrated (*cough* Debian *cough*).
The ratio of people to cake is too big
I really like it alot, so far no problems. The only thing I don't like about a fedora box is that I have to hunt around for weeks to get the necessary multimedia stuff in it.
a /linux/$rel easever/$basearch/freshrpms
I found this info quite by chance after moving from RHN to yum after installing Fedora core. I've posted this before, but here it is again:
Add these lines to your yum.conf (watch out for the slashcode extra spaces in the baseurl line):
[freshrpms]
name=Fedora Linux $releasever - $basearch - freshrpms
baseurl=http://ayo.freshrpms.net/fedor
And for all your patent-encumbered multimedia needs, you just need do:
% yum install mplayer
% yum install xine
% yum install [whatever else you want]
and it'll resolve all dependencies and keep you away from rpm-hell but still within RH's rpm goodness.
NOTE - freshrpms haven't got Feodra Core 2 rpms yet - give them time!
I installed FC2 test3 and played with it, and FC2 final. Installed on my Toshiba 1135 laptop like a charm (dual boot). The GUI applets never have a problem configuring my wireless card. After setting the /etc/sysconfig/rhn/sources file to a good source (I like duke.edu) the updates work just fine.
Red Hat sure does make a desktop look pretty. But in configuring it this way, you also lose things:
* FC1 and FC2 have disabled the Gnome menu system. The RH bugzilla says it's because the Gnome code is buggy. The real reason has to do with how RH replaces menuing file system with their own that works across KDE and Gnome.
* You install RPMs at risk. On FC2 test3 I installed smb4k from a FC1 rpm. Lost my entire Gnome menu structure on restart. Oops!
* You install ordinary RPMS, etc. (such as Fire****) and the menus and other L&F don't match what RH installed. You might not even get it into the menus (What? You can't edit the Gnome menus to add Fire****? Too bad...).
* You don't get the experience promised in the user manual. For example, Gnome 2.6 help files say that in getting to SMB shares you go to the Network panel and click on "Add SMB". Red Hat has removed that.
* Actually, SMB connectivity is my main problem with FC. It will see your Windows network, allow you to see the computers on the net, but if you try to see shared folders it tells you that all folders on the target are unreachable. I can sometimes access a folder if I build a Location, setting the smb address and getting the right combination of username (with a \\domain?), password and maybe group (maybe not). Working blind.
It doesn't have to be that way. Load smb4k on other distros (SuSE, MEPIS, Knoppix, Mandrake). It almost *leaps* to let you see the shares. Access is a breeze. Install the same app on FC and it says smbmount (smbclient? smbload? I forget) needs more setuid rights. Just more obstacles. And I'm not totally sure on the security implications of giving those rights.
BTW, I turned off the firewall in case RH was having problems with SMB. Just for testing. No effect on the solution.
I'm coming to realize that various distributions are creating *brands* of Linux desktops. You get used to the menu structures and come to prefer them. But you get locked into branded RPMS (no more RPM compatibility, as tenuous as that was before). Or locked into certain package sources, such as Xandros with its customized GUI applets. God help you if the company goes under.
I'm currently inclined to base my laptop on the MEPIS distro, as it points at ordinary, and numerous, Debian mirrors.
YMMV, but that is my experience.
slapt-get --upgrade
Ahem.
:-)
Debian Unstable (sid) is only slightly less bleeding edge than Gentoo.
Debian Stable (currently woody) is about as bleeding edge as a wooly mammoth.
The joke would have been funny if you knew what you were talking about.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?