Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fedora Core 4 Available

Posted by Hemos on from the here-comes-the-flood-again dept.

Limburgher writes "As of a few minutes ago, the torrents listed at duke went live. Nothing on the main site yet, however. The more people get on the torrents, the faster they will be. You all know the drill." Update: 06/13 19:07 GMT by T : Also in Red Hat-related news, halfbyte_hosting writes "CentOS 4.1 is now on the mirrors and ready for download."

51 of 550 comments (clear)

  1. Fedora Core 4 is great... by coop0030 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I actually just did a new dual-boot install of Fedora Core 4, and Windows XP, and found Fedora Core 4 (the beta is the one I installed this past weekend) about 10 times easier to install than Windows XP. It was incredibly easier to configure after the installation, also.

    Here is that commentary about my process (I am a first-time user of Linux):
    http://www.mygadgetbag.com/MGBCommentary/tabid/183 /ctl/ArticleView/mid/575/articleId/319/Dualbooting WindowsXPandLinux.aspx

    Also, for anyone wondering, here is a link to the newest updates that are in Fedora Core 4:
    http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc4/#s n-new-in-fc

    I am very happy with Fedora Core 4 (beta) after using it for a few days. The only thing I am having trouble with is connecting to the Yum repositories, as described on the Fedora FAQ.

    The main Fedora site is updated now, also!

    1. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Iriel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I can understand the desire to feel a little more control than being a 'test subject', some of that just comes with the territory of Linux/OSS in my mind. While I don't claim to speak for everyone, how often do you use OSS that isn't in some form of testing stage. For me and most of the developers I know, by the time a new stable version comes out, the new beta has about 4 new features, a better GUI, forum threads on fixing beta bugs, or any combination. I like having almost every option at my disposal. Besides, who doesn't like the hearing about someone using a 'new' program and telling them, "Oh I've been working with that since the alpha!"

      --
      Perfecting Discordia
      www.stevenvansickle.com
    2. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes,
      But Windows XP came out (I think) before all of the nForce2 malarky. This gives it a large dis-advantage. Until recently, I would always have a nightmare trying to install debian on to an nForce2 board. I would need to install a separate network card to start it working. I still use the nvidia graphics driver.

      You may correctly claim that this is one advantage that linux distro's have over windows due to the regular(ish) updates. But most hardware ships with windows drivers. The same cannot be said for Linux.

    3. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've been very pleased with Fedora 4t2, which I've been running for a while, with apt4rpm instead of yum as my package acquisition method. My only real complaint is that when they say that you can use reiserfs but they don't support it, they mean that "it doesn't work".

      I figured out some tricks to make it work, though: boot with commandline "linux reiserfs selinux=0". That'll stop the installation of the init package from failing like it would if you left of the selinux=0 line (and no, disabling selinux during the install setup doesn't work). Then, after boot, you'll get a grub error. Boot instead with a boot disk. Copy your kernel image (not move - you need it to be rewritten), delete the original copy, and then copy it back. Your system should be bootable. At least, this all worked for me. :)

      --
      "This wallpaper is killing me. One of us has got to go." -- Oscar Wilde on his deathbed
    4. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by LDoggg_ · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know . . . I think I still prefer my linux from a non commercial entity that isn't just throwing me bits and pieces to test as a guinea-pig for their corporate product.

      Bits and pieces to test?
      Nice troll, the distro has been solid and getting better each release.

      I haven't used RedHat since 1997, but after the whole "enterprise" thing followed by the "fedora" program, I don't think I ever will.

      Well, since you havent used it since 1997, you have no idea what you are talking about.
      You're missing out, I HAVE been using it since 1997. With the exception of a few releases (redhat 6.0 ,7.0,7.1) its been a great distro. I haven't had any problems with the fedora core releases. I was a little upset that FC3 had a few packages removed, but they made it back into FC4

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    5. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by NipsMG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You have GOT to be kidding me.

      10 times easier than windows XP?

      I think Windows XP installer asks for a grand total for 3 inputs. Computer Name, User Name, and Time Zone.

      You bitch about having to download SP2, yet you're installing the most recent version of an operating system (Fedora core 4) against an old version of XP (XP sans SP2, yes you can buy xp with sp2 included). If you installed Fedora Core 3 and wanted to update it to the newest version, you'd have a butload of updating to do also.

      If you're not using DHCP, you'd definitely have to manually set up a network connection in ANY OS. Which is very confusing to anyone not familiar with any os.

      The fact that your stuff didn't work off the bat is probably because it's specialized hardware, or something very non-standard that probably came with a driver disk for that purpose. If you lost it how is that XP's fault?

      I'm not saying Fedora Core 4 isn't easy to install, but don't overdo it.

    6. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      >>10 times easier than windows XP?
      >>I think Windows XP installer asks for a grand total for 3 inputs. Computer Name, User Name, and Time Zone.

      No, really. Fedora only asks for three-tenths of a prompt for input.

    7. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You conveniently forget that installing Windows does just that, install Windows.

      No apps, no security updates, a lot of drivers missing, etc.

      Now compare that with the install of a modern Linux distro. See the difference?

    8. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well unless you consider SATA to be specialized hardware, Fedora handles it with no problem...with XP you need a driver disk for the SATA controller to even start the install. This was even using a disc slipstreamed with SP2.

    9. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by udderly · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I hear a lot of people complaining that FC sucks, but that hasn't been my experience. I've been using FC1 since it came out to run backups on an internal network and over vpn. It often has more than 30 concurrent connections. Currently it has been up for 178 days w/o reboot.

    10. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by ratta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are forgetting that after installing WinXP you will still have to install a lot of drivers, of which many are difficult to find (many computer producers put drivers in the computer when they are selling it, but after that it is difficult to find them in the internet). And let's not forget that installing WinXP is a mess if you hae a Serial ATA or SCSI hard-disk...

      --
      Wondering why i am doing so strange posts? I am trying to get a "+5,Flamebait" or "-1,Insightful" rating.
    11. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by naelurec · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have GOT to be kidding me.
      10 times easier than windows XP?

      Sure.. why not? After you install Windows you get umm.. Windows. After a Windows install (even from an SP2 disk) I generally have to go search around for device drivers and install them, do the Windows update, install software (Office suite, good instant messenger, graphics program, good CD burner app, etc..) and during hte process, hunt down a handful of real long alphanumeric strings that I get to enter to apparently show that I am worthy.

      Now Fedora lets see .. install Fedora. Generally hardware detection is much better and my hardware is detected and configured properly (granted this could be due to the fact it is newer, but alias, Microsoft doesn't offer updated ISOs of WinXP for me to download.. so I think its fair .. latest release to latest release). Oh yah, it comes with the apps I need to use ... so perhaps the quick step of updating *ALL* the software on my system to make sure its the latest versions (versus just Windows via Windows update and manually downloading for the rest..) I am pretty much done after installing Fedora.

      I think the distros for quite a while have beat Windows for going from 0 to productive. I can do a full Linux install in well under an hour -- I'm lucky to get Windows installed in an hour before thinking about installing the apps that Linux comes with.

      I think Windows XP installer asks for a grand total for 3 inputs. Computer Name, User Name, and Time Zone.

      Try installing again and let me know how many prompts it takes until you get a useful system where you can get work done.

    12. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by EvilStein · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, I installed Windows and I got support for my RAID card.

      Tried installing Fedora Core 3 and got absolutely nothing, because apparantly the drivers for the very common MegaRAID Enterprise 1500 card were yanked.
      I'm lucky that I wasn't one of the many people that did a kernel upgrade from RHN/RPM repositories to find out that the box would't boot after a reboot.. :(

      Point is, hardware issues affect any operating system. Fedora isn't a magical OS that just works on everything. :)

    13. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One's an operating system, first released several years ago, while the other is a distribution, first released a few days ago?

      That's hardly a fair comparison.

      If I asked Microsoft TODAY to sell me their latest released Desktop OS, what would they sell me? Windows XP SP2, with their bundled apps MS Wordpad, Paint, Notepad, WMP. And if I wanted a MS Distribution comparable to a Linux distro in terms of bundled apps, they'd also offer me MS Office, Windows Movie Maker (free), and MS PLUS for themes, for an additional price.

      If I asked the Fedora project TODAY for their latest OS release, I'd get FC4, complete with all their bundled apps.

      Competition isn't always fair. MS hasn't released a new OS for a while, but they still want to compete, so Win XP is what they have to offer. It's perfectly reasonable to compare the two, since they're the two latest OS's from Fedora and Microsoft.

      --
      $8.95/mo web hosting
    14. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by Chirs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, I *own* systems where windows needs special motherboard drivers, but linux just autodetects.

      As the original poster said, you can't download up-to-date WinXP isos. FC4 will have support for newer hardware then a WinXP cdrom.

      Note that there are still classes of hardware (laptops in particular) where linux falls short, mainly due to a lack of documentation. This is however improving.

    15. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Meh. XP is old as hell now. New motherboard, new graphics card, new sound card...All these things will require downloaded drivers. And some hardware doesn't bundle its drivers with windows for whatever stupid reason.

      I also hate how windows update forces reboots after every download it considers major. Really slows things down, and doesn't continue automatically after the reboot with the other stuff you need to download.

      Then there is all the stupid free crap that ought to be included, but isn't. Winzip, Acrobat, putty, winamp, AIM, Cygwin & Firefox (heh heh).

      Then comes all the paid stuff. And all of that has to be updated. Total pain in the ass.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    16. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by FauxPasIII · · Score: 4, Informative

      > oh come on, now you're just trolling....

      Likewise.

      > nothing has ever come close to XP in regards to device drivers,
      > NOTHING. And to compare that to ANY linux OS is ridiculous.

      Whatever you say. In my laptop bag I am carrying a USB floppy that does NOT work in Windows XP at all (the only driver
      the manufacturer ever released for it was for Win98 and doesn't work.) I have a PCMCIA DVD-ROM that required a hard-
      to-find driver to work in Windows from expnet.com. I have a compact flash bluetooth radio from belkin that doesn't work in
      any Windows OS and NEVER WILL (only available drivers for download are for WinCE/PocketPC and PalmOS.)

      All of these devices _just work_ in Linux.

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    17. Re:Fedora Core 4 is great... by LnxAddct · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... And they didn't even write the software! They just wrote a couple of shell scripts to configure shit for you, and released someone else's work...

      Please tell that to all of the kernel developers they pay, or gnome, openoffice, GNU GCC and Classpath developers. Don't forget the Apache developers, cygwin, X.org, and the many other developers who Red Hat pays their salaries, costing millions each year, to develop free software. Red Hat is by far the single largest contributor of code to OSS, this is one of the main reasons why their distribution tends to integrate seamlessly together. Also note that Red Hat sells support, try buying that from Microsoft and see how cheap it is, it'll cost you $200 a phone call or you can get some package deal for something like $1200 a year. Red Hat is the lowest price point in the server market, even compared to Novell. This is why Microsoft tries to argue facts based on TCO, they can't compete with Red Hat's low pricing and they know it. You can't just compare initial product costs because no serious corporation buys software without support unless of course their IT department is willing to lose their jobs when shit hits the fan. Red Hat's support has also won many awards because of its quality and has always been a pleasure to deal with. Get your facts straight and stop trolling. Michael Dell just invested $100 million into Red Hat, Michael Dell is a smart businessman and wouldn't just throw money around like that. He sees Red Hat going places. If Red Hat sinks like you want it to, you'll see a huge decrease in open source productivity. They literally pay for some of the brightest engineers to work on this software (most notably Alan Cox)
      Regards,
      Steve

  2. I beat the Slashdot effect by Nighttime · · Score: 5, Informative

    Managed to snarf a copy over the weekend from an unsecured official mirror. Four CDs, each about 630MB.

    Installed it onto my ThinkPad T23, 733MHz/1.13GHz with 512MB RAM. Familiar graphical installation procedure, auto-detected everything in my laptop. Didn't expect it not to, as previous Fedora Core releases did so. When setting up the soundcard though, couldn't hear the test sounds but booting into KDE produced the familiar jingle. SELinux option during installation is Enabled or Disabled, no halfway house as in FC3. Compiling with GCC4.0 has made a noticeable speed difference, especially in KDE 3.4. Start-up time seemed quicker as well.

    As always, read the release notes. They have taken the decision to move some stuff off into the Fedora Extras project. XMMS was the main one I noticed. And yes, this being Red Hat-influenced, there is no support for MP3 or DVD playback straight off the installation discs.

    If you have a Matrox-based card that requires you to use the Matrox-sourced mga_hal module, you're not going to have much luck configuring X until they release a new version for X.org 6.8.2. I get lovely vertical bars every 1cm on my TFTs using a G550 DVI.

    --
    I've got a fever and the only prescription is more COBOL.
  3. Release Notes by WombatControl · · Score: 4, Informative

    The release notes are here. Major changes include:

    • GNOME 2.10
    • KDE 3.4
    • OpenOffice 2
    • Xen Virtualization
    • PowerPC Support
    1. Re:Release Notes by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      To anyone thinking of downloading this, be warned that these are bleeding edge features! Fedora is the first place they often get tested, and they don't always fit together smoothly. Not to mention that many individual features are not out of Beta testing! So only use this distro if you don't mind getting burned a little bit!

      Otherwise it can be a great way to understand what is coming down the pipe. :-)

      P.S. Parent poster forgot about GCC 4.0. That's a MAJOR feature itself, but also one of easiest to get burned by.

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    2. Re:Release Notes by LnxAddct · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Considering the intensive amount of quality assurance that goes into each fedora release, I wouldnt worry too much about it. I've been using it since Core 1 and have yet to be burned. Its nice having all the latest and greatest stuff, while also having it all integrate together, but also having an OS that I feel comfortable running on my laptop or servers.
      Regards,
      Steve

    3. Re:Release Notes by Nailer · · Score: 5, Informative
      Fedora is the first place they often get tested

      Er, no.

      Rawhide is where things first get tested.

      After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 1

      After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 2

      After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 3

      After that, Fedora Core 4 beta 4

      After that, Fedora Core 4

      After that, Red hat Enterprise Linux.

      Fedora works. It has a lot of texting. Report a bug, and someone will fix it. That someone probably works for Red Hat.

      RHEL works too. And it's a lot more conservative - which yes, probably means it's a little more reliable, but doesn't mean FC is unreliable or a beta test. See bullet points above. Stability is a yes no thing, it's a more or less thing.

      People don't buy RHEl cause FC is unstable. They buy RHEL so they can install a box this year and get 24/7 support, and training, and not have to upgrade, till 2011.

  4. Upgrade path by learn+fast · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is it easy to upgrade from FC1 to FC4? I have a semi-production server that's running on FC1, and I don't want a clean install.

    This is not an off-topic question. The response to this question will make a legitimate point about the FC model.

    1. Re:Upgrade path by bflong · · Score: 5, Informative

      In short, no.
      There is not even a supported way to upgrade from FC3 to FC4, or even from a FC4 test release. The reason being explained to me was that testing all that upgrading would greatly slow down the release process. Personaly, I'd rather have to wait another month or two for a release then have to fresh install. It's not as big a deal as it is with windows though, since all the user settings are in /home and easy to back up and restore. But for those running servers on FC, ouch.

      --
      Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
    2. Re:Upgrade path by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry, but no. Upgrades from any FC release to any newer FC release are supported. Upgrades from any RHL release (well, since RHL 3.0.3) to any newer FC release are supported

      What's not supported is upgrades from tests (like FC4 test3) to stable releases (like FC4). That's it. Tests are not meant for use on production machines, or non-production machines by those who don't want to deal with the pain of actually, you know, testing stuff

    3. Re:Upgrade path by mattdm · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is not even a supported way to upgrade from FC3 to FC4, or even from a FC4 test release.

      That's not true at all. Upgrading from release to release is completely supported -- not in the "call Red Hat and they'll help you" sense, but in the "designed to work and if doesn't it will get fixed" sense.

      Upgrading from test releases to final releases isn't supported (sometimes last-minute back-outs of dead end ideas makes that hard) but generally works.

      And live update of a running FC3 system to FC4 via yum isn't officially supported, but also generally works just fine.

  5. Re:Yet again... by dbleoslow · · Score: 3, Funny

    Have the editors not learned from all the times they've done this and screwed up in the past?

    You're ID 202812 yet you speak like it's your first time here :-)

  6. the mirrors are populated long time ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedor a.redhat.com/linux/core/4/i386/iso/>
    http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedor a.redhat.com/linux/core/4/i386/iso/
    http://ftp-stud.fht-esslingen.de/pub/Mirrors/fedor a.redhat.com/linux/core/4/i386/iso/

    http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/lin ux /core/4/>
    http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux /core/4/
    http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux /core/4/

    ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/4/
    ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/4 />
    ftp://ftp.tu-chemnitz.de/pub/linux/fedora-core/4/

    and many more....

    dont wait for shitty slashdot to report on old news.

    cuz nothin is older than the news of yesterday/yesterhour/yesterminute...

  7. Now that Debian's back in the game.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... what's the incentive of moving to moving to Fedora. I don't mean this as a troll - I like Fedora filling the gaps for people who didn't feel comfortable with Debian Unstable - but it feels to me like Debian's a bigger organization with more resources to handle more packages than Fedora. Especially since red hat left it. Is there reason to believe Fedora can continue competing without it's corportate ties?

    1. Re:Now that Debian's back in the game.... by LnxAddct · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nice troll, RedHat didn't leave it. Infact every core engineer is paid for by RedHat. RedHat simply let the decision making process become a little more open. Fedora is not unstable, where as Debian unstable used to break on me monthly. Fedora is highly integrated and easy to use. The same devs working on Fedora are usually the same devs doing the majority of kernel development, Gnome development, Apache, OpenOffice, etc... so things tend to work real nice together. This latest release only goes to show moreso how great it is working out. RedHat however did not just let them go, Fedora is a huge part of their enterprise offering, RedHat still fully backs Fedora.
      Regards,
      Steve

    2. Re:Now that Debian's back in the game.... by alue · · Score: 3, Informative
      See here and here.

      Debian and Fedora are different distros w/different purposes. Fedora releases twice a year w/the latest and greatest, while Debian releases far less frequently w/a selection of old moldy stable tested proven software. Whereas Fedora brings the bleeding edge to just a handful of the most popular platforms w/o providing a convenient upgrade path, Debian makes itself available to both more platforms than any other distro and a systematic manageable way to upgrade to future releases. I may as well say this more clearly:

      Fedora
      • released every 6 months
      • latest software
      • supports few mainstream platforms
      • no feasible upgrade path


      Debian
      • years b/w release
      • old stable software
      • supports several platforms
      • well-designed upgrade system


      If you're looking for a desktop distro, Fedora would be an excellent choice. If you're running a server on the other hand, Debian would be the obvious choice.
  8. Two major Core 4 fixes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The load times are definitely faster and it's nowhere near as dark all the time.

  9. Best slashdot ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Torrent download rate before slashdot posted the story: 10 KB/s

    After slashdotting: 145 KB/s (flirting with my max bandwidth)

  10. If you don't like FC4 by Goody · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...wait five minutes and Fedora Core 5 will be out.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  11. Re:Minutes ago?!? by Limburgher · · Score: 4, Funny

    I submitted it 2 hours ago. :)

    --

    You are not the customer.

  12. Re:Main Site News by m85476585 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It was on the main site a few hours before it was on Slashdot. You just had to push refresh.

  13. pre-emptive apt vs rpm rebuttal by pyros · · Score: 3, Informative
    You can't compare apt and rpm (command line tools). These are the only comparisons which are valid
    • command line dependency trackers - apt vs up2date/apt/yum
    • binary package formats - RPM vs DEB
    • command line single package management tools - rpm vs dpkg

    If you make any comparisons which cross the above boundaries, you are either trolling or have a fundamental misunderstanding of what you are discussing and should reald up before posting.
    1. Re:pre-emptive apt vs rpm rebuttal by windex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      rpm = dpkg, yum = apt

      yum is just about as good as apt. it's a little slow on every system i've used it on.

  14. Try OpenSolaris. by Martin+Marvinski · · Score: 4, Informative

    OpenSolaris is coming out at the end of June. OpenSolaris is basically Solaris 10 in source code form. The license is the CDDL which is basically the Mozilla Public License with restrictions removed .

    http://www.opensolaris.org/faq/licensing_faq.html

    Anyone can create an OpenSolaris distro, in fact the guy who created cdrecord for linux (Joerg Schilling) is creating one called SchilliX.

    http://schillix.berlios.de/

    The great thing about OpenSolaris is that it is the opensourcing of Solaris 10 which means it has all the features and stability of that Operating system. It also has features that Fedora Core or linux don't have.

    An example is DTrace. With DTrace, one can specify sensors in Solaris 10 and monitor everything. Even user programs.

    You also have Zones in OpenSolaris which are like BSD jails, but are easier to maintain and create. Linux has user mode linux, but that is cumbersome compared to Zones.

    SMF in OpenSolaris is questionable in benefit, but it allows services to be restarted automatically if they fail. Not something I'm interested in, but some people may like it.

    But if you are unhappy with the bleeding edge of Fedora Core, give OpenSolaris a look when it comes out later this month.

  15. Re:Linux Trademarked? by hpa · · Score: 3, Informative

    The USPTO registration number is 1916230.
    http://tarr.uspto.gov/servlet/tarr?regser=registra tion&entry=1916230&action=Request+Status

    (Note: the mentioned William Della Croce is someone who fraudulently attempted to register Linux as a trademark; he got sued and transferred the trademark to Linus as part of settling the lawsuit.)

    Typed Drawing
    Word Mark LINUX
    Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: computer operating system software to facilitate computer use and operation. FIRST USE: 19940802. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19940802
    Mark Drawing Code (1) TYPED DRAWING
    Serial Number 74560867
    Filing Date August 15, 1994
    Current Filing Basis 1A
    Original Filing Basis 1A
    Published for Opposition June 13, 1995
    Change In Registration CHANGE IN REGISTRATION HAS OCCURRED
    Registration Number 1916230
    Registration Date September 5, 1995
    Owner (REGISTRANT) Croce, William R. Della, Jr. INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES 33 Snow Hill St. Boston MASSACHUSETTS 02113

    (LAST LISTED OWNER) TORVALDS, LINUS INDIVIDUAL Assignee of FINLAND 5774 CANNES PLACE SAN JOSE CALIFORNIA 95138
    Assignment Recorded ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
    Attorney of Record ROBERT T. DAUNT
    Type of Mark TRADEMARK
    Register PRINCIPAL
    Affidavit Text SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR).
    Live/Dead Indicator LIVE

  16. FC4 rocks by Nailer · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been running FC4 (actually Rawhide, the equivalent of Debian unstable) on a Mac mini / Hitachi PJXT100 (yes, my computer is 16cm, my screen is 4m) for a few months here. Bluetooth Apple mouse and keyboard too. A pretty weird hardware setup. Everything works reliably.

    In particular, OpenOffice 2 rocks. In FC it comes as individual packages for each app - ie, I get by with openoffice-core, openoffice-writer, and the English language package. In Ubuntu, I have to install and, worse, update a few massive packages.

    Gnome does cool stuff. Like never stealing focus. An app wants focus, it pulses in the task bar. As it should be.

    Extras now works well, it's easy to get a package into Fedora and there's a lot of useful stuff available. The days of having to go to freshrpms and dag wieers to find your app are numbered - FC4, FC Extras, and Livna for the patented stuff will satisfy most people. Other distros never had this problem, but other distros still don't have decent config tools, and other distros don't install menu items when they install GUI apps. Yes, this means you Debian.

    There's a non-poo directory server that has proper ACL support (unlike OpenLDAP, where they were kept outside the directory), multimaster replication. etc as part of the distro. Combine it with JXplorer and you've got a decent Open Source LDAP server.

    Off topic: once installed, OOo 2 is the first version I'd say would be on par with MS Office. The toolbars are decent - they no longer take up an entire row, and can be edited and docked together at will, like you damn well expect. Spell check can count selections. Floating docks becomes sidebars. And, surprisingly, it can work with MS Offices proprietary XML files. All the usual OOo features are still there

    Other nice things about recent Fedoras:

    FC3 and newer: Partitioning uses LVM by default. Online resizing is supported. Ext3 has signficant speed improvements, bechmarks favorably against Reiser, and unlike Reiser, works properly with SELinux.

    FC3 but expanded in FC4: SELinux is enabled by default. For example, Apache is prevented from reading files who don't have the 'web content' context, and cgi scripts can't access particular device files without the right context either. If someone breaks into apachge, the chances of them going further than breasking into your web site are limited.

    One note: while yum is getting better, I don't use it. Instead, I use Smart Package Manager. A command line and GUI tool from the author of apt-rpm and Synaptic, that replaes both those tools, and works with Yum metadata repositories. It's faster (downloads in parallel from each source), has a better GUI, and simpler error messages than yum and apt (no 'but version foo will be installed'-without-any-explanation type stuff).

  17. Here's a good question by portwojc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I want to know what hardware Fedora supports. Like which RAID controllers, Ehternet cards, video cards, and Etc are supported. Where do I find this information at?

    Is there a list out there somewhere that is easy to look this up on or do I have to dig around for every little piece?

    I checked the Fedora FAQ and nothing popped out as a definitive list. Just base hardware requirements.

    Thanks

  18. Extras by Mr_Icon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Something that's not mentioned -- this is the first release of Fedora Core with the "Extras" repository enabled by default. Fedora Extras is a volunteer packaging project of various software not in Core, and is currently providing additional 1,000 packages ready to install just by running "yum install foo."

    If you don't see your favorite package in Extras, you can always become a contributor yourself.

    --
    If you open yourself to the foo, You and foo become one.
  19. Re:Desktop Linux users, don't bother with Fedora by poofyhairguy82 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now this isn't really fair. I'm like Mr. Ubuntu, but I admit that Fedora has some neat things that Ubuntu lacks currently. Xen, SE Linux, a graphical installer, a Usplash, among other things. Fedora is a good distro and does a good job of hammering out the most bleeding edge stuff before anyone else has too...

    --

    Open Source Sushi

  20. What about multimedia? by ratta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The last time i have tries Fedora it was really poor about multimedia... I know about patent problems, but i could barely play an mp3 with the crappy helix player from Real let's not even talk about playing an (undencrypted!) DVD!!!!! I think that been able to play most widespread audio and video formats (with Xine or Mplayer) should be a key point for a moder linux distro.

    --
    Wondering why i am doing so strange posts? I am trying to get a "+5,Flamebait" or "-1,Insightful" rating.
    1. Re:What about multimedia? by bogie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't doubt you tried Fedora but did you even do any searchs on google regarding this? At all?

      All of that and more is explained at several easily findable and popular FAQ and howto sites specific to Fedora and this issue. I'm not even going to list them but just typing Fedora and mp3 or DVD in google is enough to answer all of your questions.

      This isn't a case of me being "shut the f*** up noob! Read the man!" either. Fedora's multimedia policy is easily found and fixed with the most basic of efforts. The fact that you knew about the patent problems and why certain codecs aren't included with Fedora shows your clearly smart enough to figure out the first thing you should have done when you had a question.

      "I think that been able to play most widespread audio and video formats (with Xine or Mplayer) should be a key point for a modern linux distro."

      Right and Fedora and every other distro out there can do that. You already know why that can't be done with a truly OSS distro so why the fuss? Can XP rip to mp3 and play DVD's right out of the box?

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  21. Yes, the installer is easier than Windows XP. by Nailer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's insightful? Moderators, and the poster above: have you ever done a full install of Windows XP and Fedora?

    Could you explain to me how Windows XP could possibly be easier?

    1. The Windows installer starts as a 32 bit command line application for partitioning, EULA, loading driver disks, with a reboot into a GUI once a base install happens. It uses F8 and F5 to do things. Fedora uses 'next'. Windows is getting a full GUI installer in Longhorn when WinPE comes out. It doesn't have one now.

    2. The Windows XP installer asks for many more than 3 inputs. You forgot partitioning, EULA agreement, that disk thing I mentioned above, and a bunch of other stuff. The things you did mention are weird - eg, I select my time zone by scrolling through a drop down list box of time zones sorted by GMT offset. Not even geography. Not even FC4 'click where you are on this map'.

    3. The defaults are a lot less secure too - non non admin user, Run As doesn't work for all programs, the firewall lets in ports where known worms live by default (see the Register analysis of SP2 for a complete list). Obviously, there's no MAC implementation enabled by default either (SELinux). And most network services still run as SYSTEM. So post-install you're either gonna have to lock it down, or fix up the mess.

  22. Fedora Core 4 Review by SilentBob4 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Mad Penguin published a "progress" review of FC4 not too long ago and it was a pretty good read.

  23. Not understanding how Bit Torrent works ... by dougmc · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The more people get on the torrents, the faster they will be.
    This is not true.

    The average download rate of a torrent is pretty much independant of the number of downloaders -- that's what's so neat about it. (Compare to downloading via ftp or http -- double the number of downloaders, and you half the average download rate, assuming that you're out of bandwidth in the first place.)

    If you've got a torrent being seeded by some fast sites, then adding new downloaders on cable modems (fast download, slow upload) will generally slow the average download down rather than speed it up. But it won't slow down to almost nothing, which is what happens if thousands of people are hitting a ftp or http server ...

    Now, if people who are downloading leave their BT clients running after they're done downloading, then the average download rates (of those still downloading, that is) will go up, as there will be more sites seeding at that point.

    But in general, merely having more people using BT to download something will not make the average download rates go up. BT is way cool -- don't get me wrong -- I love it. But it's not magic ...

  24. Will it run on WindowsXP Professional or Longhorn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I am new to the whole "computers" scene, and I am wondering if this "Redhat Fedora Core Linux 4" will run on my windows. I am running windows 98. Will I have to upgrade to windows XP if I want to use "Redhat Fedora Core Linux 4"? Or will I have to wait for microsoft longhorn before I can run it on my computer. Also, does it work with my flat screen monitor?