Fedora Core 2: Making it Work

Joe Barr writes "Linux.com is running a followup article by Ken Barber to his initial review of Fedora 2. This time he explains how to tame the GNOME and Fedora 2 problems he noted the first time around and get them both in working shape.."

Comments

awesome timing

[BitchAss]

I literally *just* finished installing FC2 on my lappy. I'm running 'apt-get dist-upgrade' right now :)

I'm pretty happy for the most part - it's more responsive than FC1 - the menus are very snappy. I'm having a weird problem - none of my mail clients will check an IMAP account - weird, non?

MP3 support

[Mr_Silver]

I understand the reasons they do it, I respect the reasons they do it -- but in all honesty, I think it's a pretty silly idea to make users jump through hoops so they can listen to their MP3's.

We complain about Microsoft bundling stuff within Windows -- but it's got to the point where a user expects a certain number of applications to come with the Operating System and I would consider MP3 support to be one of them.

Sure, I know it's a no-brainer to install it afterwards but if Fedora's goal is to encourage mass market adoption, then they should consider that an individuals first impression counts - even more so when something they take for granted isn't there from the beginning.

Re:The problem being?

[moorg]

So....If I understand the article right, to make Fedora Core 2 good, you need to install packages, change some gettings for gnome, and adjust the sound properties?

As long you don't quit on the spatial mode Nautilus as quickly as the author you don't need to make any changes.

Personally, I always rearrange the GNOME panels from the default Red Hat/Fedora layout to the default GNOME layout (Applications, System menu on the top panel). But that's my preference, and certainly not something I should shake a stick at the Red Hat/Fedora guys.

Perhaps the author would enjoy reading The Spatial Way then debate the merits rather than pull a "my desktop doesn't look they way it used it, it must be broke".

system bell problems

[pomakis]

I upgraded to Fedora Core 2 just yesterday (from Core 1), and encountered and resolved some of the known problems (such as IPV6 being enabled by default, etc.). However, there's another problem that I haven't managed to resolve yet. My system bell no longer works. If anybody else has encountered this and knows the solution, please let me know! I'd appreciate it very much. FYI, I'm using fvwm as a window manager, so KDE-specific solutions such as "Control Panel --> Sounds --> ..." are useless to me.

(Oh, and "xset q" shows "bell percent: 50 bell pitch: 400 bell duration: 100", so that's not the problem)

Re:Very Cool

[xanadu-xtroot.com]

Don't just complain about the problems that you encounter, like it's some sort of major flaw in the system, which discourages people from adopting it.

But if the "default" install is messed up to the point where someone's going to have to boot back to Windows to get to the Internet to dig through numerous Google searches to just have to boot back to FC to start working on basic issues, isn't the adoption of "Linux" already blown? If the people that work on Fedora are "expecting" Joe Sixpack to use it, but the person can't even play an mp3 without "yum xmms-mp3" (not that that is hard, but how would Joe Sixpack even know how to do that without booting back to Windows and running a bunch of searches)?

I propose your logic is 100% backwards. Yes, it's REALLY DAMN NICE that the info is "out there", but should someone have to resort to digging through all that just to get their machine simply working when 90 bucks at the local Target later, they have a operational XP system? (assuming that they had a blank machine, of course, which they most likley did not)

My experience with FC2

[DigitumDei]

Well having just installed FC2 myself and being a complete and utter n00b at linux, I have to say that as far as desktop readyness goes I was most impressed with FC2. The install wen't pretty much without a hitch, everything worked for my desktop purposes, and unlike any windows install, by the time the install was finished I had a full office suite. Incidentally I always have problems connecting my XP machines to the network properly (none huge, but enough that they don't connect first time), yet the linux box was connected and talking to the internet without me even setting anything up!

Now if I had been installing a machine for a secretary or office worker, I would have been essentially finished within 2 hours. Unfortunately this was to be my movie/music player, attached to my tv. Two weeks later I finally managed to watch a dvd without a glitch.

For a standard desktop install: FC2 - 1 XP - 0
For a multimedia box: FC2 - 0 XP - 1

Disclaimer, these are my experiences and obviously a different person with different hardware would most likely have a different outcome.

Fedora closer to Debian than the old Red Hat

[bangular]

I think a lot of people are under the impression "Yeah, Fedora is just Red Hat under a new name". Fedora is a completely different beast all together. I wouldn't put Fedora in the same class as Mandrake or Suse. Fedora is muich more cutting edge/ development oriented. The type of crowd that actually should be using Fedora aren't going to have to boot back into Windows to read info about their problem. They will boot back into their other linux partition, mount the Fedora partition, chroot to it, and fix the problem.

isn't the adoption of "Linux" already blown?

Fedora is wrongly reccomended to those that haven't already adopted linux completely. Everyone really should stop using Fedora and Red Hat synonimously because they aren't. If you want to adopt people to Linux, reccomend Suse or even Mandrake. Reccomending Fedora is like reccomending Debian to a newbie.