Slashdot Mirror
Fedora Core Release 3 Released
anyweb writes "Fedora Core Release 3 is out now, Heidelberg, 2.6.9-1.667 kernel, Firefox included ! Gnome 2.8 and more.
Here are
some screenshots" New release includes Gnome 2.8, KDE 3.3, Kernel 2.6.9, Firefox PR1, Thunderbird 0.8, Ximian Evolution 2.0 and more. Here is a Mirror List and Bit Torrent
I guess..first time some city name is used for linux version.. earlier windows and other M$ products were named after places eg. whistler for XP. and even tcp versions too like tahoe-reno.
Maybe just use apt and yum to upgrade
The recommeneded way to upgrade is to use installer (annaconda), some people have reported problems using yum or apt.
1) Download FC3 ISO images
2) Burn them to CDs
3) Put on the FC3 cd and click on upgrade
can't get any easier than that. I wouldnt want to use yum or apt because of the GCC upgrade.
Just appears to be a collection of the binary CD isos (no source).
and wasn't just a Fedora issue. I hadn't heard about it, as I don't run Windows on my home machine, until I had to install it here at work. The main thing is to not let it futz with the partition tables at all during an install.
Best Slashdot Co
Six months. It's always six months. You need to download them sooner, perhaps. ;)
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
It was a problem specific to fc2, has been fixed forever in fc2 updates and non-existant in fc3.
If fedora is the base for which RHEL gets developed, why do they keep releasing new versions? When do they decide which fedora release gets frozen to develop RHEL 4?
What do you mean "why do they keep releasing new versions"? They keep releasing new versions because that's the point of having a distribution. Fedora Core partly exists to support RHEL, but it has its own life as well -- think Mozilla and Netscape, OpenOffice.org and StarOffice.
And "when do they decide"? Well, market realities mean they need a new RHEL release every certain amount of time -- probably every year and a half or so. So when that "when" approaches, I imagine they look to see what the most solid current Fedora base, and develop along with this.
In fact, RHEL 4 is being developed in parallel with FC3. See this LWN.net article for more details.
The name of a German city. Insightful, huh? :-)
Actually, it's Fedora 3' release name.
I'll do the stupid thing first and then you shy people follow...
If you are in Europe and looking for a fast mirror, try this one (i386; x86_64 is here).
80 minutes after the release and my bandwidth and HDD speed is still not maxed out
(IAAAOTS - I am an administrator of this server).
-Yenya
--
While Linux is larger than Emacs, at least Linux has the excuse that it has to be. --Linus
Yes, you can either download the CD and use it to boot, then do a network install through an FTP or HTTP server (just make sure you find a server before booting because it doesn't give you a list or anything). If you can't even get the CD to boot and you already are running Linux just mount the iso as a "virtual drive." This is how I installed mine.
Pretty much any company that releases both consumer and business software uses the consumer software to test the waters and once it seems okay they make the fixes and sell it to businesses along with 5 year contracts. Thats just business, get over it. At least Red Hat isn't ripping off the consumer, the Fedora development model isn't too much different then it was with the RH desktop distro... but the community kept complaining that it wasn't free and Red Hat made very little money (something like 3 million dollars) from its desktop version so they released it to the community as Fedora. Now the consumer gets probably the highest quality linux distribution avaialable, along with a huge supporting community. I use Fedora because it is stable, but has the latest and greatest. It is the only distro that runs on my laptop, and it is the only distro that I have been able to reliably install on just about any machine. If you haven't had the pleasure of using it, I would suggest you do so.
Regards,
Steve
> It was a problem specific to fc2
Not true. Mandrake 10 and Suse 9.1 also had this problem.
As one of the parents points out, it was an error with the parted application used by all three distros listed above.
From this morning...
570 Mbit/s (about 540 Mbit/s of which are mirrors.kernel.org, i.e. mostly Fedora); load average 232.44.
screenshot link is already slashdotted here's another site. http://osdir.com/shots/slideshows/slideshow.php?re lease=110&slide=1
"A good friend will bail you out of jail. A true friend will be sitting next to you saying, 'damn....that was fun!'"
They have a release schedule and try to stick to it as strictly as possible. 6 months ago they had no say in when Firefox 1.0 final would be released. FC3 was originally slated for November 3rd, got pushed back because the devs had some minor bugs to wipe out. Anyway... this is a great week for FOSS, and now you have time to d/l FC3 install it and upgrade to Firefox 1.0 tomorrow and then party on Wednesday :)
Regards,
Steve
it is a single torrent that creates a directory with four ISOs for install and a fifth ISO labeled rescue...
Heh no contest, try Fedora Core 3. It goes under much more extensive testing, has a nice development cycle. It has a gigantic community and every major open source project releases rpms for Fedora. Not to mention everything *just works*, runs fast and the desktop if very well integrated and looks nice. Give FC3 a shot, it is by far the best release yet.
Regards,
Steve
That is not how things work. This isn't like debian where after a certain amount of time unstable is simply renamed stable. RHEL is developed completely apart from Fedora and the purpose of Fedora is not to be a testing version of RHEL. The purpose of Fedora is to get the bugs out of the bleeding edge software as fast as possible, not to debug the distro. A release early, release often strategy is the best way to obtain that goal.
Already! Announces here.
Although all Fedora releases are given whole numbers, they're clearly not all going to be huge changes. I think of them like this (and I don't work at Red Hat, so I can, without getting in trouble):Really, the changes don't look all that dramatic this time around.
Remmber, Red Hat has always put out new releases about every six months. You probably shouldn't set your watch by it exactly, but you might be able to by the averages. The new "Fedora" scheme lets them be more loose with making radical changes without waiting a year and a half (.0,
The Fedora Core 2 DVD image also included the source discs. With Fedora Core 3 the DVD only contains the same binary data as on the 4 regular CDs. Makes more sense this way in my opinion.
It's like deja vu all over again.
It works very well. To upgrade from FC2 to FC3 using yum do:
Then watch it churn. Of course, if you have third-party software installed, you may want to wait till your vendors catch up with FC3.
If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
Yes, you can put the ISOs on a NFS mount on another box and use the network install method. From my personal notes:
... your network card must be supported by the boot disk."
"Just boot the installer (first CD of the Fedora distro or a special boot disk) and at the prompt type "linux askmethod". From there just follow the NFS boot option. If you put the boot disk on a CDRW then you don't even need to waste a CD every time you try a new Fedora version.
I did this with FC2 and had Everything installed and booted in about 15 minutes.
Uh, no .... Have a look here and tell me where it mentions stable/testing/unstable. The official Fedora package set contains exactly one version of each application. Third party packagers like Fedora.us and Livna.org have adopted the stable/testing/unstable split, but they are separate entities from Red Hat, and are not official Fedora packages.
I'll readily admit that I won't use Fedora without adding Fedora.us and Livna.org to my yum/apt sources, but you're either mistaken in your understanding of the Fedora community or spreading FUD.
This is completely the opposite of what Linus himself thinks. We've got a new kernel development process since the last kernel sumit, and the final stabilization is now explicitly left to the vendors.
2.6 is now both the stable and development branch for the foreseeable future. New features are rapidly integrated and 2.6.x.y versions are optionally released for stability, but a lot of the testing and QA is being offloaded to the distributions.
I personally want Red Hat to tweak their kernels. That's what a distributors job is in my opinion, pulling software from all sort of sources and integrating them into a coherent product. I want Red Hat to include fixes for ACPI, CD recording, and basically do everything to assure that I don't have to compile my own kernel. Red Hat employs some of the best core kernel developers, over the years they've earned my trust and that of my company's. So in a sense, yes, they can do better, and we expect it of them. Perhaps that's not the kind of vendor you're looking for, in which case just stick to Slackware.
It's like deja vu all over again.
It's been working fine for me since FC2 came out: I don't have to hand-roll my own kernels anymore, and packages for things like video translation libraries are available in RPM form from the "dries" repositories, in yum-compatible mirror shites.
here
If this is really how you feel. I can't think of any major Linux distrobution that doesn't ship will Mozilla. Mabye when Firefox reaches 1.0, then distros will consider including it in their offerings, but right now you're asking for pre-release software in a stable distribution offering.
Use yum. Make a copy of your yum.conf called yum.conf.update, and replace the $releasever everywhere with the number "3". Then run "yum clean; yum -c yum.conf.update check-update" to pre-load the header files files, and "yum -c yum.conf.update yum; yum -c yum.conf.update update" to actuall do the updates. The new version of yum has some nice pre-downloading features, which is why I recommend updating it first.
Three easy steps to installation bliss: 1) Put each ISO image into an NFS share on a remote computer. (You don't even have to unpack the images -- as some HOWTOs suggest.)
/var/local/nfs/fedora/tettnang/).
2) Burn only the first ISO to CD-R. Upon boot (from CD-ROM), when the "Linux:" prompt appears, enter the following:
linux askmethod
3) Profit! Uh... No. Actually, after a: selecting NFS from the list and b: requesting (DHCP-enabled networks) or specifying an IP address, c: enter the NFS server's IP address and the NFS path where the ISO images are located (not the mount point, the actual path from the root -- e.g.
And that's it! If you're connecting over Fast Ethernet, your installation will be unbelievably fast -- and you can avoid having to swap CD-ROMs as you go.
Here's a suggestion about apt-get and upgrading between FCs: Don't. It's not supported. When things break, you have nobody to complain to other than whoever maintains your apt packages. If you want to upgrade in the safest way possible, boot from the first CD and upgrade via the installer (Anaconda).
Just replace the strings with the appropriate flavors:
/pub/fedora/linux/core/2/i386/
>pwd
Ergo, replace
$releasever --> 2
$basearch --> i386
I used such a hardwiring to update RH7.2 to 7.3 ever since the former was dropped by Fedora Legacy.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
heidelberg-binary-i386
d FC3-i386-SRPMS-disc1.iso8 c9cc2236 FC3-i386-SRPMS-disc2.iso3 561cd787 FC3-i386-SRPMS-disc3.iso9 2f44ef36 FC3-i386-SRPMS-disc4.iso3 f689b412 FC3-i386-disc1.iso6 4e FC3-i386-disc2.iso7 9b FC3-i386-disc3.iso0 ea FC3-i386-disc4.isoc 75 FC3-i386-rescuecd.iso
p O8 stFfclAwCfWy6h
- ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2 99 FC3-x86_64-SRPMS-disc1.iso8 e7da633403 FC3-x86_64-SRPMS-disc2.iso2 75455d45a4 FC3-x86_64-SRPMS-disc3.isoe 31a9f20c85 FC3-x86_64-SRPMS-disc4.iso4 f0054a4d79 FC3-x86_64-disc1.iso0 7ec9 FC3-x86_64-disc2.isob 1b82 FC3-x86_64-disc3.iso1 9226 FC3-x86_64-disc4.iso
k Ew K5ilz9DACeIzNa
- ----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
ca49964739f84848ca78fc03662272fb FC3-i386-DVD.iso
e5e0328370d899bd77c8d5c7f1bd3ea
5cf3f9ae84d8d0ec4967961
ee5f134b6880145e576c97c
7c57d517a6b0bb98b586003
db8c7254beeb4f6b891d1ed
2c11674cf429fe570445afd9d5ff5
f88f6ab5947ca41f3cf31db044872
6331c00aa3e8c088cc365eeb7ef23
07bb34ce97b62b99f84d32812a2ee
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBiWL+tEJp0E8qb9IRAtvbAJ9ogGEnoKYeT9exJ/B
iYqa2g5AiQK3PldULLM0Zhw=
=gMjQ
heidelberg-binary-x86_64
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
2786a751df919f340d967a4833b63b16 FC3-x86_64-DVD.iso
0b9f23eff713db3a0d5a778e38d70
bd15bac386cdc30b6fcdf
d89ea5afcb3b94cbfaa3c
d177e8134ffff13e0029f
b61b0eb7e0171837aeeff
99dc12c7e8a93844a48a5675a9c
399b7ffd721ebb4244a02c34cdb
f58b1de3b880df55dbbd37d1434
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBiWW9tEJp0E8qb9IRAiL2AJ9WPp23dJDCI4KUBtO
tEhZiwbsnkhseHhKIqUGfDo=
=CjaW
Yes, just get the "boot.iso" (about 5MB) and use that, point it to an FTP/HTTP server with the RPMs, and it will pull them down.
It was written by "them".
Actually it was written by Yellow Dog. Thus the name "Yellowdog Updater, Modified".
Yum was nowhere near apt in functionality but it is getting there.
I disagree. With this release, Yum has surpassed Apt in functionality (mirror lists for example).
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.
Yes I keep a windows box around for those odd things that just wont run correctly under wine. And yes I am ashamed that I actually PAYED the Borg for the copy of Windows 2k.
But its stuck at SP2 and I can say that that is the end for software from the Borg for me.
On the other hand my linux box just keeps up updating and updating and updating as fast as I can grab the ISOs ;P
I tried to get FW working with FC2, but eventually gave up...
.iso's on a machine last week - no firewire. Did a yum update. Reboot. Perfect firewire.
There were kernel issues initially that were fixed a while later.
I installed FC2 from
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
For what's new in gnome 2.8 (from 2.6 in code 2), see http://www.gnome.org/start/2.8/notes/rnwhatsnew.ht ml
Screenshots included.
I would rather see a deescription of what new features Fedora Core 3 has that Fedora Core 2 doesn't have. Then I can determine whether it's worth the bother to upgrade. Screenshots are irrelevant. You will be assimilated.
this was very helpful (from the fedora-test-list):
To upgrade via yum the short version goes like this:
1. backup all your data
2. upgrade yum to yum from fc3
3. upgrade fedora-release to fedora-release from fc3
4. make sure all your repositories point where you think they should
point.
5. run yum list updates - just to make sure things seem sane and working
6. make sure you are NOT in X and X is not loaded
6. from a terminal prompt run: yum upgrade
7. wait wait wait
8. you must reboot before using your system again
9. reboot the system and make sure you select the new kernel, not the
old one(s)
10. once your system is fully booted you may want to install some
additional items. Recommended:
yum groupupdate "GNOME Desktop Environment"
(thx to seth vidal)
this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
Apt for RPM supports everything RPM and Fedora need, so yum is just different for the sake of being different.
Well, except apt doesn't support multiarch. This makes x86_64 a pain (if you want the ability to run any 32-bit code at all). That's the main hangup, and it doesn't look like it's going to be fixed any time soon.
One major technical issue... multiarch support.
when you need to run 32bit packages side by side with 64bit packages on 64bit cpus that understand how to run 32bit.. like the amd64 stuff. This ability is going to become increasingly important as more and more amd64 bit hardware gets purchased. Not all open source software compiles cleanly on 64bit yet, and there will always be a need to run proprietary 32bit software on 64bit systems.
my understanding is apt still doesn't have a way to expose rpm's native way of installing 32bit and 64bit packages in parallel, and the upstream apt developers are very keen on getting apt to support this sort of thing, but the ability but it just isn't there yet. Yum does have support for this, so does anaconda, so does up2date. For people using 64bit fedora core, the will be using this feature more than they are aware, as they install software that is 32bit compiled and need to install 32bit libraries in parrallel with the 64bit libraries already on the system.
-jef
Just out of curiosity I downloaded images from suprnova and checked md5sum
6 4e FC3-i386-disc2.iso7 9b FC3-i386-disc3.iso0 ea FC3-i386-disc4.iso
1 c4 FC3-i386-disc2.isof b0 FC3-i386-disc3.iso7 4f FC3-i386-disc4.iso
Original md5sum
db8c7254beeb4f6b891d1ed3f689b412 FC3-i386-disc1.iso
2c11674cf429fe570445afd9d5ff5
f88f6ab5947ca41f3cf31db044872
6331c00aa3e8c088cc365eeb7ef23
Suprnova md5sum
5f99bc2fb3685cb52ef1ea6a2a8b27ce FC3-i386-disc1.iso
eda0debffcb97f63162782818727c
f6da03ef5d78ed1fef464970c82fa
b6e2e7c9b86b49d9cab1557be0043
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition