Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Fedora Core 4 Test 1 Now Available
krunchyfrog writes "The first test release of Fedora Core 4 is now available from Red Hat and at distinguished mirror sites near you, and is also available in the torrent. New features in Fedora Core 4 test 1 include previews of GCC 4.0, GNOME 2.10, and KDE 3.4, as well as support for the PowerPC architecture. Please file bugs via Bugzilla, Product Fedora Core, Version fc4test1, so that they are noticed and appropriately classified. Discuss this release on fedora-test-list. -- The BitTorrent link is already there."
Hopefully PPC works as expected. It's a shame that this platform is so poorly supported.
Just been poring over the new RPM versions...
I see FC4 includes MySQL 4.1.10 a nice wee jump up from 3.23. Apparently RedHat are now happy with the MySQL licensing terms.
It has Eclipse 3.1, dovecot, bash 3 (with debugger), Tomcat 5 (but only 5.0, not the declared stable 5.5.7), Xen 2. And that is about all that caught my eye.
Having just been recompiling the RHEL4 sources I'm struck by how similar the versions all are. I'm presuming that rhel4 split off fc4 or vice versa a month or two back. I'd be curious how/if they co-ordinate all the patches and source code between the two different brands.
--
FC3 (now!) and RHEL4-based (soon!) VPSs
Well, can I update to FC4 test 1 using yum? ;)
Is it even possible? Since I know everyone will advise me against this, but I just want to know
I wanted to try Fedora to put another feather in my Linux cap. What is good/bad about Fedora? And whasup with the Fedora/Red Hat icon guy. He looks like he's never seen the Sun.
Why are the binary torrent images listed as being bigger than the sources?? Er, am I being thick, huh?
Was it a bat I saw? Racecar. Stack cats. A man, a plan, a cat, a ham, a yak, a yam, a hat, a canal--Panama!
I hope they'll wait for KDE 3.4.1. The .1 releases have traditionally been translation releases (unless something has changed recently).
It's rather frustrating to do translations, and then notice that they are never packaged in some Linux distributions, because the packagers don't have patience to wait for the translation release. Other than English-speaking people use Linux too, you know.
Well, probably most of the translations get in time for 3.4, so the problem isn't that big.
I don't know what you mean by that makefile making bad code thing, but gcc 4.0 sports a new optimization infrastructure. I have been experimenting with it since October, and I found it to be far superior to 3.x. Also, the compilations times are reduced somewhat.On the whole I'm quite impressed by the improvements, though I'm not sure I'd base an operating system on a compiler which is not released yet...
Anyways, Gnome 2.10, Xen 2.0 and GCC 4.0 are quite enough reason for me to download FC4 Test 1 and try it out.
My makefiles make bad code on FC1
Uh, so fix your makefiles? Luser error?
I am actually curious to see what this will do with the IA-64 arch. Not to mention what kind of performance increase you see in IA-64 with the 2.6 kernel. Anyone care to comment on anything they've witnessed?
Release NOTES
The (unofficial) PPC version of Fedora Core 3 unfortunately didn't work too well for me, so I'll be trying it again when FC4 final is released.
The full list of PPC distributions: here
"Hey, who took the cork off my lunch?" -- W. C. Fields
Can i expect the PPC version to run ok on my G3 Bronze?
What sort of stuff isnt going to work? ( yes, i did RTFA, didnt see what i was looking for )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
can users choose Reiserfs or XFS when installing fedora 4?
http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/
There are a few drivers (like sn9c102) for USB cameras that only support the v4l2 interface. And what's worse, the kernel will support your webcam and will correctly issue no error message; but GnomeMeeting will try to find the device and won't locate it without so much as a warning!
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Looking at the updates directory of core 3 there are gigs of updates in there. It didn't even install on my nVidia nForce system because of bugs in the SATA drivers in the 2.9 kernel. (It's fixed in 2.10 I believe.)
;)
Installing the nVidia drivers (because shock horror I wanted 3D) froze then system on boot because of the rhgb red hat graphical boot thingy. The switch to udev caught me out here. Luckily I figured out what was happening and sorted it.
I also had weird sound corruption in some programs which I tracked down to arts. Turning the sound down in that sorted it but I can't find any kind of a config file, let alone a GUI application that sets a sound level which survives a reboot. I sorted it my adding an entry in rs.local.
Also why on earth don't they compile NTFS reading into the Kernel. (Captive NTFS would also be nice as an option...)
Sadly your average tech fiddler on the street would have given up with this pallava and installed Windows.
XP Installation went without a hitch and worked perfectly first time. It can even play MP3's out of the box
So for all you Slashdotters out there who think a Linux install is easier than I Windows install, well it can be. Provided nothing goes wrong. Which is unlikely.
Philip
Signatures are broken
I'm due to update my home linux server from RedHat 9 and have been debating whether I should put core 4 on it when it comes out or RHEL 4. This machine does file serving, web serving, runs mysql for various small databases, etc.
Is there any compelling reason to use one or the other for this type of machine?
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Since I don't use a RPM-based distro for a long time, I also feel the urge to ask: how is the dependencies treated nowdays?
With Linus now doing ALL of his work on the PPC, and that IBM is making a big move into Linux on PPC, do you think that it will see a massive investment in time? I do.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The big question is, does it support MP3 out of the box (off the CD?). This was one of the major things that turned me away. I know it's easy to fix, but that isn't the point. It's 2005. They'd better have MP3 support.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
Does it install properly on all SATA drives now?!
This sig has been deprecated.
Err... I thought this was a test release? Test releases aren't traditionally known for their stability and ease of use.
Of course they will, that's why this is a test version. FC3 had (I think) three test releases before the final released version.
> Also why on earth don't they compile NTFS reading
> into the Kernel. (Captive NTFS would also be nice
> as an option...)
Just like with MP3 playing, I believe there are licensing/patent issues with NTFS that Fedora/RedHat just avoids by not distributing those functions.
> Sadly your average tech fiddler on the street
> would have given up with this pallava and
> installed Windows.
Test releases are really not for the "average tech fiddler on the street". If you're not ready to commit a system for testing purposes, then you/they really should stick with FC3 for now. A normal or finished user-based distro (e.g. SUSE, FC3, Mandrake..) would generally not have such problems with the install. FC4 will be the same way when it's done and not in testing.
I mod down all the "free iPod"-sig losers.
You can find answers to most of (all?) your problems here:
http://www.fedorafaq.org
Shipping NTFS and MP3 is encumbered with legal problems, that's why they're not included by default. Google can tell you that within seconds.
"It seems that there are a lot of people starting to defend the use of the debian package for the easiness of dependencies treatment"
It seems there are a lot of people who don't know what they are talking about. debs don't resolve dependencies, apt does, as does yum, yast, urpm for rpm distros. And guess what, apt is also available for rpm distros, so what exactly is your point here?
The big question is, why aren't you using vorbis instead?
And it being 2005 doesn't change that.
First thing is that YDL has been a great solution on the PPC platform. I have had an WGS 8550, G3 Server and a G3 Yossmite running YDL 3 and YDL 4 for a good while and it is great! Support and community rocks as well.
Regarding a "free" distribution, YDL is free. If you want to pay for YDL.net you get access to releases earlier along with other great features. If you want installation support alone you can by the product with it. If you want to just buy the CDs you can as well. And if you want to just download the ISOs for free you can.
I paid for my CDs without support to help chip to a fablous company!
Q: I am short, useless and provide no value. What am I? A: a sig
I don't understand why they haven't make a major change to the taskbar (the task panel). With the release of GNome 2.10, I eagerly downloaded to be disappointed by see it almost the same.
The task panel is used very often by users. I has to allow users to use the mouse to resize it. It has to keep the icon the same (user preference on this), not to expand them. A dedicated area for open windows and folders' icons and a dedicated area for quicklaunch items. Yes, you can say it should work just like windows That's not to say it copies windows, but that's how I think most logical to the users.
So, why they haven't change this? Probably the most used item on a GUI desktop.
That doesn't match my experiences at all. Mandrake installation goes without a hitch and plays mp3s fine (I don't think it will encode without an external lame.so or something, but playing is no problem). Drivers were better than on windows (I thought XP had no SATA support at all?). And kmix (the default "sound mixer" program, like you get when you click the speaker in the system tray, just like in windows) restores sound levels at kde login, plus most distros will save them when you shut down and restore when you boot up.
I am trolling
yum should be quite a bit faster in fc4test1, they've recently added a new xml parser (cElementTree) for the metadata which whips libxml2 ass (in fact, it's not much slower than reading plaintext in :))
The worst thing about the XP install is you need a SATA driver floppy to install to the sata drive. Most manufacturers ship the drivers on CD. Considering Microsoft said the floppy should be in the 1998 Computer, why in the world do they still require one for installing in 2005.
Err, no the problem is with arts, quick search reveals (analog real-time synthesizer) not the sound system which works perfectly. arts seems to have it's own sound level.
Philip
Signatures are broken
THat should be shouldn't be in the 1998 Computer.
Err... I thought this was a test release? Test releases aren't traditionally known for their stability and ease of use.
Read it again. He's telling us about his problems with core 3, which *is* released.
I didn't need one. Mind you my windows install CD had service pack 2, maybe that make sa difference.
Philip
Signatures are broken
In light of the debate surrounding package management systems (yum, apt, synaptic, .rpm, .deb, etc, etc) I have only the following. I am honestly asking myself "Why can't there be a community-maintained heirarchy of Makefiles containing retrieval URLs, compiler flags, configuration directives and configuration scripts to compile and install the extracted source code by users simply typing 'make install'??" This is (obviously) the same question asked by the BSD developers yonks ago. That's all you need. A heirarchy of Makefiles and a client-side program (cvsup) to occassionally update those Makefiles. Ports are reinstalled, deinstalled according to the POLS ... 'make deinstall && make reinstall' if you still don't get it. These Makefiles even contain the extraction/compilation/installation procedures for the inferior package management systems .rpm and .deb. To me, as a FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD user, it means so much to have such a reliable software management system. Say I want Firefox; I can just go: /usr/ports/www/firefox /. about this. Until now.
# cd
# make install
Done. I can't understand why there needs to be this reimplementation (with associated interoperability issues) of a problem we have already solved. Like the rest of the BSD community, I haven't bothered to pipe up on
I didn't need one. Mind you my windows install CD had service pack 2, maybe that make sa difference.
No, most new motherboard-integrated SATAs, particularly the RAID ones, still need drivers on top of an XP SP2 CD. IIRC it isn't possible to install on a SATA drive on a pre-SP2 XP install CD anyway - one of the guys here spent a day banging his head against it on a mixed SATA/parallel system.
However, if you've got one of those then chances are your BIOS will handle USB storage. You could probably throw the drivers on a USB device, or you can pick up a USB floppy drive quite cheaply.
Cool. I haven't seen an Windows XP with SP2 disk yet.
Err no. These are my Core 3 experiences. I expect Core 4 will at least recognise my SATA drives, but I doubt any of the other problems will be fixed.
Philip
Signatures are broken
http://www6.tomshardware.com/howto/20040908/ -- Make your own single-disk installer.
Check this out for SP2 on Windows XP install CD: linky
Woa thats a good resource. rhgb really needs to be fixed though, just freezing up is inexcusable.
It wouldn't help me with my biggest problem, with the hard disk though!
It's a pitty you don't get instructions like that as part of the release notes.
I don't see why the kernel NTFS driver would have legal problems (captive-ntfs is another matter.) It can only read but it's better than nothing. There is suppost to be limited write support available if you write to existing files and dn't change their size, but I'm not sure I would trust it.
Philip
Signatures are broken
Not a comparison but a series of questions. I installed FC3 prior to Hoary as it specifically had an Internationalization Project. I very quickly discovered that it did, but getting foreign input working (say Japanese) without running the whole thing in Japanese was not straightforward.
.gnomerc was very straightforward and almost certainly faster (better?) than sorting the same on FC3.
This didn't seem to be lost on just me either, many people seem to have written it off as a result.
Hoary wasn't instant but the process of installing the input method and adding two lines to my
So, I'm curious to know how FC4 handles:
Foreign input,
Wireless support (Atheros/Madwifi),
Alternative packages (I know this should be straightforward but I had a lot of trouble trying to install the madwifi stuff without updating the rest of my system to those packages in that repository).
In fact, now that I remember... FC3's up2date was slow and very buggy. Has this been fixed?
I don't think the legal issues can be that serious because pretty much every other distribution out there supports MP3 with their audio packages, and quite a few support NTFS. I think its more of RH not wanting to admit their wrong.
Regardless I'll go happily along with SuSE. It has new packages, great hardware detection and is usable as an everyday desktop.
Every time you post an article on Slashdot, I kill a server. Think of the servers!
I think its more of RH not wanting to admit their wrong.
Or maybe RH's lawyers are better, or more cautious. After all, what's the point of getting your asses sued off over a side project you give away for free?
I couild just as easily compare a failed XP install to a successful Linux one and reach the same (invalid) conclusion.
But that's almost the point. When'd you last see a failed XP install?
It's all the spyware that Microsoft inserted while you weren't looking. It's a ploy by Microsoft to buy Novell through their involvement with Mono, and infiltrate the CVS repositories that Novell share with RedHat. One small step for Microsoft, one giant leap for Big Brother.
Or maybe it's debugging symbols? Or just GCC 4.0?
So KDE shouldn't do an official release until the translations are done. Obviously you consider translations a critical feature, and I'd agree with you. There should be some translations of 3.4.0 available from day one (IMHO). Perhaps with more to follow, but certainly with the same version number for a major release. Don't blame a distro for putting in the latest "official" release.
"Your ignorance is astounding and complete" Thank you for the kind complement. You must be a really fun guy to be around.
"If these kinds of issues make them give up then they aren't tech fiddlers. Just common every day dime a dozen users who like to think they're tech inclinced. ie point and click monkeys."
Maybe they just have a life and have better things to do that spend hours and hours trawling the Internet downloading source, searching bug lists etc. for really simple basic problems that shouldn't exist anyway. When your installer tells you you don't have any hard disks you have a problem.
When I was installing it 2.10 wasn't out and the bug wasn't resolved. I had to revert to the deprecated driver to get it working. Later I had to edit the Kernel source, which got the SATA_NV driver working (now that would really really scare a point and click monkey) before finally 2.10 came out, which worked!
Point and click monkeys would also give up when their system just freezes up on booting as with my rhgb problem. At least with doze there is safe mode, and you can even revert to the 'last known good configuration' which I have seen get a system working again (once, I know it can leave your system in a bad way though)
"Next time you post make sure you have at least an hour of experience beyond the trained monkey stage and try to at least pretend you have half a clue. I doubt you'll fool anyone though."
Not even worth bothering to reply to this one.
Philip
Signatures are broken
BTW, I assume the patent issue is also why there isn't a mpeg video player, but I do understand that.
Xen 2.0 requires the OS to run in ring 1. This results in a few % performance decrease in most tasks. Is this enabled by default? Or is it some commandline option?
You can't really blame Fedora for the NVidia versus rhgb problem. I stumbled into that one to, and it's just one of the hits you gotta take for running an external binary kernel module on your system.
I gotta assume the audio stuff will be fixed, it seemed like it was just conflicts between ALSA and gstreamer.
SATA drivers in the 2.9 kernel. (It's fixed in 2.10 I believe.)
Wow, where are these 2.9 and 2.10 kernels? That's beyond bleeding edge!
Are there any Linux distributions which specialize in modern, up to date, bug-free, non-beta, only >1.0 software?
I've played around with dozens of distributions, only to be turned off them by discovering various half-baked flaky apps mixed in with more polished apps. In other words, I should never see a core dump more than (say) once a month, while trying out *all* the programs in the distro.
I'm looking for a distro with consistently high QC, in terms of feature completeness and bug-free implementation. Who should I be going with?
I can blame rhgb for freezing up just because it can't start an X server. If it just failed and booting continued I wouldn't be complaining.
Philip
Signatures are broken
Windows and Linux users can install FC4 test1 on their PC right now without any worry by using the PC emulator QEMU, the free and opensource vmware! Personally, I am already using FC3, and I want to make sure that I like FC4 before I switch. I also want to help find any bugs and report them during the test releases, so that they can be fixed before FC4 goes gold.
OK so I forgot the 6, get over it
Philip
Signatures are broken
I hope they did something to fix the DNS resoulution issue that was shipping with the latset FC3 release.
I installed FC3 a month ago, hoping to replace my XP installation. (only distro that will work on my abit/raid mobo easily) however, after a day of searching for an answer to a simple DNS issue, i could not get it fixed.
As we all know, its small things like this that keep the average user from making the plunge.
By now everyone should understand what Fedora is all about. It is not a production distro, it is not meant for anything but getting the new stuff working and stable FOR a production release. Thusly the releases are going to quick and should not necessarily be an easy upgrade. The fact that you can upgrade from release to relaase if you don't break anything yourself with yum IS impressive, and requires extrodanary effort from the team.
Strong Work Fedora Crew!!! Very wonderful effort.
I just popped out in my Delorian and got them on nano inch disk
Philip
Signatures are broken
I mean, why would anybody want to run an OS which is just a test platform for the real, non-free product? I mean, the days of redhat being the obvious number one choice for servers is gone in my opinion... I personally wouldn't think of letting FC getting anywhere near my servers. And why would I want to pay for RHE when I can just install a great and stable product like Debian or Slackware? I don't need RH support or their upgrade hassles and I'm sure as hell not going to pay for them.
/sorry if this sounds like a troll, but I'm serious
Meh.
...wasn't Core supposed to have just three releases? IOW, Fedora Core 1, 2, and 3? The idea was to stabalize the "core" components (hence the name), and then to move on to bigger and better things. So shouldn't this be something like Fedora Desktop 1 or whatever?
I just burned a whole set of Core 3 CD's.
I burned 9 tons of info onto a box and it looks nekkid as a picked bird. Fedora is the antiMandrake.
If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
A normal or finished user-based distro (e.g. SUSE, FC3, Mandrake..)
I wouldn't include any FC release in a list of "finished" distributions. As I understand it, the main point of FC is that you get a nice, free, pretty cutting-edge distribution and Red Hat get a lot of free testing. If you want something to work out of the box on a wide range of hardware, you are a lot safer with something like SUSE or Mandrake.
Having said that, I use FC (3, at the moment, but will probably upgrade to 4 at some stage) and have installed it on a number of machines with no problems.
Matt
Yesterday Heise had a stroy about the new Fedore beta and they mentioned, that Mono had been dropped from Fedora Core due fears regarding patent infringments. Read the translated news here.
The part that matters ist this:
"That contains however also the free NET implementation mono, which is probably not taken up to Fedora from fear of patent claims on the part of Microsoft."
which means sth like this:
Suse however contains the free NET implementation mono, which is probably not included into Fedora due to fear of patent claims on the part of Microsoft.
Anyone has more insight?
Bye egghat.
-- "As a human being I claim the right to be widely inconsistent", John Peel
I just broke down and installed a floppy drive on my system, it comes in handy once in awhile.
- Immaginez un tas de loups bioniques de ça!
- Nathalie Portman pétrifiée avec du gruau dans ses pantalons;
- http://www.SexeAvecUneChèvre.cx
- 1. Quelque chose de bête;
- 2. ???
- 3. Profits! (ceci est en fait bilingue!)
I started using Red Hat on my home server about five years ago. It's been a pretty reliable distro. But given the facts that I'm frugal (read cheap), that Red Hat no longer has inexpensive support options, and that individual Fedora package upgrades have, at times, been less than felicitous for me, I've been thinking of switching.
I switched my home desktop machine to Ubuntu (from FC3) about six months ago and have been extraordinarily happy with it (BTW - Note to Red Hat: After using Ubuntu for a while you start noticing how clunky BlueCurve actually looks. Try to be a little more crisp), but given that it is not necessarily a server-oriented solution, I'm somewhat hesitant to put it on my server. In general, I've found the Ubuntu system to give me *no* problems with package upgrades and seems to be amazingly solid.
So, my question is what people would reccommend for a good server distribution for me. I'm not really interested in huge amounts of eye candy on the server (I do most of my admin via SSH) and, in fact, a server set up that didn't need a bunch of craptactular GUI stuff to be loaded would be just fine (GUI's are for desktops, not servers). But I would like a distro that's well enough supported to have have relatively frequent binary patches for new kernel versions and that has a relatively simple upgrade mechanism. I really don't want to take the Gentoo or LFS route (I'd like to actually use the server as a server, not a compilation engine). In short, I'm loking for a quick and easy, well supported, minimalist server distro. Right now, I'm about ready to roll my own using Debian as a base, but without much more than a kernel and the few server packages I want, but if anyone has done this already, I'd sure like to know about it. So, any favorites out there?
Say you're someone who feels "Linux" infringes your "Intellectual Property" Rights. Who would you sue? If you don't pick Red Hat (or Sun or IBM, if you can find a way of getting them on the hook), you need to step down from the board.
Red Hat know they're #1 (or #3, at least) target, and so respond by being extra-cautious.
I don't see why the kernel NTFS driver would have legal problems
Patents.
I agree that RH Legal can sometimes seem bit to be bit overcareful, but as the saying goes, better safe than sorry...
Be as it may, ntfs (and mp3, and other things that are "questionable" but not outright illegal) support is in rpm.livna.org, so it's just a matter of adding one repository and yumming away.
How can people use this crap?
.deb maybe?
The package manager is the slowest damn thing on the planet. Something about RPM, I don't know, but holy crap is it slow. Resolving dependancies my ass.
Get a new distro people! *
* Or hey Fedora developer farktards, maybe switch to a decent packaging system?!
I just broke down and installed a floppy drive on my system, it comes in handy once in awhile.
Yeah, absolutely - they're like $10 if that. But if you've with a whole room of machines (like we're accumulating here) then a USB floppy does the job. As does a loose floppy drive and a screwdriver.
Maybe my sound will start working again with FC4. It worked fine with FC3 and then one day after I had done several up2dates I rebooted and I haven't had sound since.
That's why we see so many dupes - they read their submissions after they Babelfish them, so no two look alike!
I mod down all the "free iPod"-sig losers.
I can't download it yet cuz my home connection is down.
printf($randomline(sigs.txt) \n "-- "$randomline(authors.txt));
-- myself
OK, fine (I've had my share of problems with both arts and alsa) but kmix, the kde volume tool, still saves and restores sound levels.
I am trolling
Oh wait.... sorry
Paul Lenhart writes words!
This is not always "luser" error. Fedora (RedHat, et al) do so much stuff in a non-standard way that it's not even funny. This tends to break stuff and you need special conditions just for RedHat/RPM systems.
Screw that. They should work to the official standards.
Did you really mean AMD64/EM64T? AMD's current and Intel's upcoming 64-bit extension of IA-32? IA-64 is regrettably something completely different, Itanium.
> Looking at the updates directory of core 3
:)
:)
:)
:)
> there are gigs of updates in there.
So? After clean install is like 200MB download for common system (when you do something like install every package it will be more of course) - this is something unusual? They actually are fixing things so there are updates. Duh.
As you obviously need to compare to XP - with XP you *need* (yes, you certainly need to do it) download like 200MB service pack.
Also keep in mind that XP is bare system (yeah useless WMP, MSIE, MSOE, Wordpad, Sol), installed Fedora is fully equiped workstation for lots of activities.
So it is a draw here.
0:0
> It didn't even install on my nVidia nForce
> system because of bugs in the SATA drivers in
> the 2.9 kernel. (It's fixed in 2.10 I believe.)
Well it is hard to judge here because I don't understand you quite well - next time you write about some imaginary bug in kernel 2.9 (hint: current kernel is 2.6) please also post URL to Bugzilla entry and if you don't find such entry - open one for you. How you wish to get things fixed if nobody knows about them?
As for me I've just installed contrib RPM packages with nvidia driver and it worked without any further tweaking needet (but I've tweaked it anyway - I like to tweak).
Also a draw here since no arguments were given.
0:0
> Installing the nVidia drivers (because shock
> horror I wanted 3D) froze then system on boot
> because of the rhgb red hat graphical boot
> thingy.
I haven't noticed that. But that may happen - nvidia module conflicts with vesafb sometimes, but that is stated in README. Also I will put a draw here. My answer will be "I've installed Windows as default and in 5 seconds it was compromised by some worm from Internet" - like I should know about it.
0:0 still...
> The switch to udev caught me out here.
udev is actually very nice if you manage to get how it works.
(...)
> I also had weird sound corruption in some
> programs which I tracked down to arts.
Well arts sucks.
> Turning the sound down in that sorted it but I
> can't find any kind of a config file, let alone
> a GUI application that sets a sound level which
> survives a reboot. I sorted it my adding an
> entry in rs.local.
Hmm. Well I don't know, my Fedora does store sound mixer state on shutdown.
> Also why on earth don't they compile NTFS
> reading into the Kernel. (Captive NTFS would
> also be nice as an option...)
Well this is due to legal problems with NTFS. I belive in US it is not compatible with GPL (due to patents or smth.) so it is not free (like in speech). Fedora is distributed for free (as in beer) also RH belives in free/openess so they won't distribute and base their distro on non-free stuff.
But it is fairly easy to get NTFS support in FC3. Try google around it.
> Sadly your average tech fiddler on the street
> would have given up with this pallava and
> installed Windows.
Well. No. I consider myself an average tech fiddler. And considering situations like yours - f.e. if I would somehow get unsupported (by Linux) audio card I would rather buy new supported one than use Windows.
And it is not about zealotry that I say "Linux is the best, Windoze suxxors". Nothing like that. I just like running Linux - it suits me. Also I like to be free which Linux offer me. Probably Windows is better in some ways but I would not sacrifice my freedom for it... It is what it all is about - freedom.
> XP Installation went without a hitch and worked
> perfectly first time.
Oh! Here I would give 1 point to Linux. Man Windows installer sucks ass... I know it is suitable to do home system install on one computer. But this installer can't do anything. F.e. it cannot do part
I _was_ a loyal RedHat personal distro purchaser (purchased every copy because I wanted to give them my financial support). Started with version 4, and kept using them to version 9.
I wanted a stable Linux distro to use as my workstastation, surf the web, do my programming/experimenting with Java, C/C++, Postgres, etc., etc....
Once they made the business decision to stop selling/packing/distributing a stable personal distribution version I had a dilemma.
So, after lots of research... finally made the tough call, and got Debian 3.0r4.
Oh man! Love it!
On the same hardware box (old Athlon 700, 384Mb RAM, 15Gb IDE hard drive) as what I ran RH9 on, it seems quite snappy and RAM friendly.
So, a sincere "thank you" for RedHat to for:
1. Having a good personal distrobution for versions four to nine.
2. Discontinuing selling "personal" distributions, as then I would never have met and switched Debian.
Me
Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
I'd go careful with generalizing from one example though... there are an incredible amount of factors (fiscal, political, cultural etc.) that contribute to a country having something as vague as "top research" - or "creative research", for that matter.
Can't get Disc1 .iso to mount in OS X or work in a NFS install. Pulled the corrupted Disc1 .iso down from bittorrent and the fedora site. Downloading the DVD .iso using bittorent right now...
You are not root, go away.
You are asking Red Hat / Fedora Core engineers to anticipate the loading of a proprietary driver that they have no control over?
/etc/udev/devices. Personally, I think it is more Nvidias fault than FCs. Fortunately all of this was in the Release Notes for FC3 (or linked from it). I know this because I never ran into that problem on my systems where I use Nvidia drivers.
I agree that it would be better if rhgb just failed and continued booting.
Or Nvidia could have modified their installer so that the correct links are made in
-DU-
"Don't sweat the technique."
It's just such a pain to have to wait for it to access the floppy, and then wait to read/write to it. I find it so wierd that 3.5in drives never got any faster until years later, after CD-Rs, with Super-Disks, which never even caught on.
Installing the nVidia drivers (because shock horror I wanted 3D) froze then system on boot because of the rhgb red hat graphical boot thingy. The switch to udev caught me out here. Luckily I figured out what was happening and sorted it.
Realize that this is partly Fedora's fault and partly Nvidia's fault. Their latest releases are a lot more udev friendly though - fc4t1 with all nvidia patches hasn't had any Nvidia problems yet, and it just worked.
Anyone who downloads this expecting stability is fooling themselves - this is basically the development tree or rawhide packaged up.
That said, here's some installation notes.
1) Mediacheck doesn't seem to work. At least I haven't seen anyone who can get a PASS for the DVD or CD isos. I've booted directly from a checked iso and still FAILed.
2) Despite what you tell it, the installer will install grub on your MBR, not on a partition.
3) Firstboot doesn't work on first boot. This is fixed in rawhide by installing gnome-python2-gnomevfs, which also fixes the system-config-* utils.
4) The packaged GDM eats CPU. "yum update gdm" before logging in through GDM or regret it.
Gnome 2.10 has some nice improvements, but nothing amazing. Unless you're willing to do a lot of testing, don't bother. That said, the only thing really stopping me from using this instead of FC3 is a lack of other repos - FreshRPMS, Extras for FC4 - and a sata_sil regression for my SATA drive always hanging.
XBOX2 != XBOX
NTFS on Linux has no legal problems. It's all reverse-engineered using only a hex editor (i.e. without the use of copyrighted code or patened algorithms), and Red Hat is the only distro not to include it by default.
You can get NTFS RPMs fro the latest Fedora here.
Vino, gyno, and techno -Bruce Sterling
Late reply I know, but here we go.
.6, so shoot me. Some responses on here have just been shooting me down for that minor brain fade. This shows the attitude problem some Slashdotters have clearly. Rather than just correct me (as you have done), some piss taking allowed, ridicule the poster for a minor error in an attempt to make them look silly and not challenge them about the point they were trying to make. I am not a machine, sometimes I make still errors, get over it. Not that I expect better on Slashdot mind you :)
;). Actually thats not quite true, if you are going to break it in a way that will affect an awfull lot of users at least disp
First point: Service Pack 2.
Service Pack two was available on many magazine coverdisks soon after it came out, so there is no need to download 200mb at all. Updates since have been quite small, I can't remember how small but certainly only a few megabytes. Now I purchased my XP for real money. Shocking concept I know for the average visitor here, but the genuine OEM disk purchased with my machine came with service pack 2 already on it. So there was no need to download it at all.
Thank god Fedora comes with packages, because if I had to download it all it simply wouldn't be an option for me on dialup. I dread to think of the hassle involved in downloading all the different components required for a system. I would kill for setup.exe software installation ease on linux, installer package size be damned.
The is plenty of software available for Windows that will bring it up to the same level of functionality as Fedora. Some of it is even free and the same as you will find on Linux (Fedora, OpenOffice etc.). Guess what, it's even easier to install it.
Understand that I have no problem with Open Source Software, in fact I prefer it. I am merely pointing out the difficiencies in some of the attitudes towards the poor bod who actually ends up using it and in one particular product, Fedora itself.
3 Points to Windows.
3:0
Second Point: SATA problems
OK so I forgot to put in the
You wanted bugzilla entries, try here and here. Not a lot that would help the average user. You shouldn't need to be a programmer to install an operating system anyway. Infact not many answers at all, just silently fixed in 2.6.10. Please don't assume I haven't already posted it to Bugzilla next time.
Argument: Fedora won't even install, XP has no problems and didn't even need a driver disk. Pretty simple eh?
1 Point to Windows
1:0 - Ah can't be bothered with the silly scoring any more.
rhgb: It happens without fail. My main problem is with it freezing and not just giving up and allowing you to boot in text mode. Also why haven't they added a non rhgb startup option to the bootloader anyway if it is unreliable.
We all know Microsoft and a secure computer don't sit well together. But they are working on it at last. I've had no problems at all - yet - cross fingers sacrifice first born. Mind you I do keep the patches up to date, use the firewall and keep my virus checker up to date.
My installation media came with service pack two and my virus checker was installed before connnecting to the internet. Some common sense is required here however...
Mind you I'd rather clean a virus attack off a doze box than a linux box. God knows what would get changed, what back doors would be left around. If linux ever catches up with windows, I would be really supprised if it didn't suffer the same level of attacks, virus infections etc.
udev may be nice, but my first priority is a system that works. If it isn't broke then don't fix it
Philip
Signatures are broken