Slashdot Mirror


Fedora Core 4 Available

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."

15 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: 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.

    3. 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?

    4. 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.

    5. 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. 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

  4. 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)

  5. 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.

  6. 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.
  7. 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.

  8. 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.