Slashdot Mirror


Red Hat Begins Testing Core 5

Robert wrote to mention a CBR Online article which reports that Red Hat has begun testing on Fedora Core 5. From the article: "The next version of Raleigh, North Carolina-based Red Hat's enterprise Linux distribution is not scheduled for release until the second half of 2006 but will include stateless Linux and Xen virtualization functionality and improved management capabilities. Fedora Core 5 Release 1 includes updated support for XenSource Inc's open source server virtualization software, as well as new versions of the Gnome and KDE user interfaces, and the final version of the OpenOffice.org application suite."

17 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. They should be farther along by BennyB2k4 · · Score: 4, Informative

    They are actually behind their goals for releases. I've read elsewhere that it should be every 6 months.

    "Produce robust releases approximately 2-3 times per year, using a time-based release model: A time for a feature freeze is set in advance, and an expected schedule for test releases is produced before the feature freeze date. (Important feature schedules will be taken into account when setting the schedule for Fedora Core releases.)"

    http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html

    1. Re:They should be farther along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The most irritating thing about FC5 is the long wait... they've decided to leave ~9 months for it. The problem is that there are parts of GTK that have, over the last few months, *FINALLY* been optimized by someone who knows what they are doing -- and they are now dramatically faster (this is quite apart from the other massive optimization efforts for speed and memory going on in GNOME right now). All Fedora users are going to have to wait until the second half of 2006 before we see these improvements... and believe me when I tell you that GNOME/GTK desperately needs them.

      It doesn't look like they will be backported, so it's GTK2.8 and the next version of GNOME... which means FC5... which means 9 months wait for something that's very badly needed.

    2. Re:They should be farther along by justsomebody · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is that there are parts of GTK that have, over the last few months, *FINALLY* been optimized by someone who knows what they are doing

      ??? Now, where did you hear that stupidity?

      Reasons for delay are:
      - Trusted X (SELinux based X11)
      - Xen integration
      - Free Java replacement
      - Live CD
      - RHDS integration
      - Actualy trimming setup to 1 or 2 CD-s
      - Boot speedup
      - New sound server
      - Library deprecation

      Here is Wiki about it for you to get your facts straight
      http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FC5Future

      This are all too big plans for them to keep at 6month release. That is why this was changed to 9 months not GTK. GTK being speed up is just one of additional features that coincides with FC5 timing, not the reason.

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
  2. Re:Off to Debian by tolan-b · · Score: 3, Informative

    Fedora uses yum as the backend for up2date for its updates, no accounts required.

  3. Re:Mature? by saikatguha266 · · Score: 5, Informative
    A common myth regarding Fedora. From http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraMyths

    MYTH - Fedora is unstable and unreliable, just a testbed for bleeding-edge software

    FACT - This misconception comes from two things:
    1. From http://fedora.redhat.com/: "It is also a proving ground for new technology that may eventually make its way into Red Hat products."
    2. Fedora has rapid releases, a short life-cycle, and a lot of new code.


    As for the first item, this means that Red Hat uses Fedora as a platform to promote the development of new technology, some of which might end up in Red Hat Enterprise Linux. This does not mean that Fedora is a dumping ground for untested code, it simply means that Fedora is a rapidly progressing platform.

    For the second item, this does mean that Fedora is often running in uncharted innovative territory, but not that it is using too-new code. The programs in Fedora are generally stable releases or well-tested pre-release versions. There are guidelines behind the inclusion of pre-release software, and thorough testing is always done prior to Fedora Core releases.

    Each version of Fedora Core receives updates from the Fedora development community that includes Red Hat for up to a year. Continuing updates from the Fedora Legacy Project may extend the life of a release to two years or more, depending on the release schedule. Refer to http://fedoralegacy.org/about/faq.php for more details.

    We do everything we can to make sure that the final products released to the general public are stable and reliable. Fedora Core has proven that it can be a stable, reliable, and secure platform. Many businesses and organizations rely upon Fedora Core for both day-to-day tasks and, in some cases, critical infrastructure. Additionally, our well-managed packaging and review process adds an extra layer of safety not found in some other distributions. You can count on Fedora Core.



    As someone who has used FC in production, I can attest to the its stability.

  4. Re:skimpy by un1xl0ser · · Score: 4, Informative

    Stateless Linux (from http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/stateless/)

    The Stateless Linux project is an OS-wide initiative to ensure that Fedora computers can be set up as replaceable appliances, with no important local state.

    For example, a system administrator can set up a network of hundreds of desktop client machines as clones of a master system, and be sure that all of them are kept synchronised whenever he or she updates the master system. We provide several technologies for doing this.

    The scope of the project is the entire OS, since we are trying to improve configuration throughout all packages. However, there are some packages which are specific to Stateless Linux:

            * readonly-root
            * stateless-common
            * stateless-client
            * stateless-server

    --
    v4sw6PU$hw6ln6pr4F$ck 4/6$ma3+6u7LNS$w2m4l7U$i2e4+7en6a2X h
  5. Re:better wireless hopefully... and install... by spazimodo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ubuntu has WPA support - search in Synaptic for WPA_supplicant. (You may need to enable Universe/Multiverse)

    This post brought to you on a Dell D600 running Ubuntu Breezy Badger using WPA.

    --

    Fsck the millennium, we want it now.
    Millennium Crisis Line: 0890 900 2000 [calls cost 50p/min]
  6. Congrats Fedora Core Team! by shane2uunet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why do a lot of the postings to articles boil down to

    "that is crap use this"

    Don't these people realize that no solutions fits every situation? It blows the mind.

    Anyway, I love Fedora Core. I use it on my desktop at work, Running FC 4 right now. Stable as can be, gives me the tools I need. See, I'm a system administrator. I have about 7 RHEL systems under my administration that I personally over see. Fedora Core allows me to see what will soon be included in RHEL and get familiar with it.

    Why Redhat? If you have to ask, you don't know linux or open source. They contribute millions of dollars to opensource and to linux development. Sure they're making a buck off support and I'm glad to pay it, in return I get a rock solid OS that is guarenteed to be there in 7 years. Oh, and Redhat seems to be doing pretty good finacially too, as seen on Slashdot here recently.
    http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/15/ 1732235&tid=110&tid=187&tid=106

    I just don't understand why they are upbraided for that. They're just trying to make a living at linux, same as me. I mean, if you don't want to pay, RH has even allowed (by the GPL) others to make almost identical OS (CentOS), only thing missing is the shadowman.

    I can't wait for FC5 to go live, I'll be upgrading.

    --
    This space available for rent.
    1. Re:Congrats Fedora Core Team! by killjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "But, all of a sudden, out of the blue, RedHat announced "no more free linux from us". Then, they released RHEL, and it was a couple of months before they announced Fedora Core was coming out. RHEL pricing is completely insane."

      All they said was that they wer eno longer interested in trying to support mom and pop with redhat. There is nothing wrong with that. They didn't take anything away from you, you still have fedora core.

      If you want EL without paying for it there is centos and others too.

      Red Hat is in the support business. When you pay for RHEL you are paying for support and in order for them to deliver credible support they have to have a known good quantity to support. RHEL is simply a support package against a known good snapshot of Fedora Core.

      By the way if you think that when you buy windows XP MS will answer all your questions for five years you are in for a big surprise.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  7. Re:Any chance of an English translation of this?? by gowen · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was browsing a baseball site the other day and they kept using terms like "suicide squeeze" and "relief pitcher". Bastards.

    Clue : If you're reading a tech news site with a leaning to Linux, it'll probably help to have some idea of the latest major developments in technology, as they relate to Linux. If you don't know what Xen is, or what a virtual server is, it's not as if it's hard to find out

    --
    Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
  8. Re:5? by DrWhizBang · · Score: 4, Funny

    Everybody knows you can't use version number over 9. Why do you think Apple went to "X" and are holding it there? At the same time, point releases are so 1990 - Look at how Sun abandoned them entirely by dropping the "2" from "2.7". Microsoft, on the other hand, decided that people don't like numbers, so have thrown them out entirely.

    Redhat got up to 9, and had to reset the counter with Fedora Core. The next step is to build your version numbers up again (since point releases are passe). Mark my words - once it hits Fedora Core 9, they will rename it to "Fedora NG R1" or something silly like that.

    --
    Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
  9. Re:5? by LnxAddct · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are advancing fine, every major release deserves a major number. These aren't minor releases, Core 4 was the first distribution using the new GCC 4.0 at the time, it also has default Xen support and a new yum manager that is much faster than the old one. Also Fedora Extras was establsihed with Core 4 and a bunch of other stuff. There have been similar milestones with the other Cores (such as integrating SELinux). Each core is a significant advancement over the previous core and deserves a major number change, not a minor number. I'm understating the improvements here. They aren't doing this to inflate their version number, it just so happens that enough people are helping out that they can get kick ass releases out pretty fast, not to mention Red Hat pays many engineers to work on it 5 days a week. They have however recently cut back their release schedule from every 6 months, to every 9 months to allow them to spend more time fully developing certain functionalities that can't be coded in a 6 month timeframe. Also for the curious minded, the Fedora community just finished up a fairly long community discussion about its new logo. The way that the winning logo was designed I thought was neat, you can read about it here.
    Regards,
    Steve

  10. Re:Stateless Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I think Stateless Linux is a great idea. In fact, I think Gnome should be extended so that a session can span several computers where the person logs on to. Then we could couple up distributed computing on top of that and make it part of the Stateless Linux-Gnome system.


    Gnome had saved session stuff for a while now... and it all sucks.

    What we need more is...

    Have you ever used 'screen'? It's a multiplexor for the unix shell. Allows you to open up multiple shell instances on different computers on the same terminal, and then be able to disconnect the shell and still leave everything running on the background. Allows you to move from computer to computer while disconnecting and reconnecting over ssh and such without loosing anything.

    It's very handy.

    X Windows is a networking protocol. The X Clients are just programs like Firefox, or Nautilus, or Abiword, or any game that runs ontop of your X server, which is simply the program that controls your inputs and monitors and displays the outputs of your X Clients on your local machine.

    X Clients can be anywere (once the networking is enabled.. there are certain security considurations with X, which is why networking outside your local computer is disabled by default) on your network.. They can be on your local machine, remote machine, on the internet anywere.. It doesn't matter.

    Think of it like your X server is your X Browser and the X clients are like frames or websites on that you interact with. They can be anywere.

    What we need is a standard way for X windows to have a thing like 'screen' were you can save your current output and move it to any computer that can handle X windows.

    Sun already has this for their excellent X terminals that they sell.

    Not only that we need a way to move programs from one X Server to another. You can run multiple X servers on your machine, I do that all the time. I also run X servers on my laptop and other computers that I have aviable.. I should be able to move the a X client from machine to machine, from output device to output device without stopping or restarting any programs.

    If you combine that with network-based home directories, some sort of networked sound system, and network authentication and directory system, then you should be able to use any system transparently. It will be roaming desktop.. but on steroids. Not only you could use and have your home enviroment on every single computer in the system.. but also be able to use any program on any computer on this system.

    Combine that with clustering capabilities, such as distributed file systems and the ability to migrate not only proccesses from computer to computer, but using Xen moving entire running operating systems from computer to computer.. then we would have a true Network-based operating system.

    The entire computer network of a corporation, school, or other orginization will be able to share proccessor, memory, and disk resources transparently. Any part of the system, any computer, would be a plug-n-play system.

    You buy a Dell. You format Windows off of it, you plug said Dell into network. Thats it. Thats all it would take to install Linux on it and make it work with the rest of your networked computers.

    This is what stateless linux is working for. Stateless linux is the first major step in this direction.

  11. Re:better wireless hopefully... and install... by FireFury03 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Linux on the Desktop? Not if the user has a wireless card.

    The problem with the wireless hardware is that:
    1. Most of the manufacturers haven't released any specs so the driver writing has needed lots of reverse engineering.
    2. Much of the hardware has gone through rapid development cycles, meaning that by the time the drivers are available you probably can't get the hardware anymore.
    3. Linked with (2), many of the manufacturers sell their updated revisions under the same name, model number and even FCCID in some cases, even though the new revision is *completely* incompatable with the old revision, so you may end up researching which hardware will work only to find that when you buy that hardware is is an incompatable revision.
    4. Most cards require uploadable firmware which the manufacturers won't release under good licences so can't be shipped with most linux distributions as standard so you have to download it yourself.

    The Prism54 drivers are a good example of (2) and (3) - the drivers were of good quality but by the time they made it into the stock kernel Intersil had stopped making the supported chipset and had replaced it with a completely incompatable SoftMAC based chipset. A number of the manufacturers, such as SMC, released the cards using the SoftMAC chipset under the same name and model number as the old ones and it was nigh on impossible to know which version you were going to end up with because even the retailers didn't know there were 2 incompatable versions of the same card.

    I understand that the new Prism54 drivers now support the SoftMAC chipsets so maybe I'll fetch the incompatable SMC card I ended up with off the shelf. Interestingly, the Prism54 website says they're working on an open GPL firmware and I hope they succeed in producing it as that means we can at last have some hardware *completely* supported by a vanilla kernel. Having GPLed firmware also opens up some possibilities for new uses for the hardware since interested parties can hack the firmware to do strange new things (enhanced Mesh networking, etc?)

    Speaking from experience of setting up supported Prism54 802.11g cards under both Fedora 3 and 4, it's simply a case of grabbing the firmware and sticking it in the right place and then it Just Works - you can't get a lot easier than that unless the distributor breaks the firmware licence and bundles the firmware illegally.

    The last time I installed Fedora Core 4 off a boot CD I was amazed that to do an ftp install I still had to punch in manually what mirror I wanted to do the install from. Computer games have been grabbing "master server lists" for some time now. Can't something similar be worked into the FTP install?

    Maybe you don't want to install off one of the official mirrors?

  12. Re:What is XENSOURCE Virtualization ? by argoff · · Score: 3, Informative

    XenSource is the company, Xen is a modified linux kernel pair that allows multiple opperating systems to run on the same physical hardware. It is different that other virtualisation because it uses a kernel hack rather than complete emulation of the foriegn host to create this environemnt. Because of that, it has a very small overhead - typically under 4%.

    They have Xen kernels in the package list for FC4, and I used them without much difficulty. I thought it was rather nice, I set the virtual machines to auto start upon bootup of the parent kernel. Another nice feature is that virtual machines can be transfered "on the fly" while still running, between different physical hardware on the same subnet.

  13. 100% FUD by bani · · Score: 3, Insightful
    strange, I work at an ISP and we've had used exclusively redhat, from RH5 all the way to FC4 without problems.

    For one: I keep hearing people say that redhat contributes "Millions" to the open source community. Where?


    http://sources.redhat.com/ecos/ http://sources.redhat.com/redboot/ http://sourceware.org/jffs2/ http://cygwin.com/ http://people.redhat.com/mingo/exec-shield/ http://sourceware.org/insight/ http://sourceware.org/cluster/ http://sourceware.org/systemtap/

    and don't forget ext3 is largely bankrolled by redhat.

    there's lots more. just because you're unaware of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    And is it significant compared to the return they get on it?


    why don't you ask them?

    Are they only doing it because it benifits them?


    why don't you ask them?

    I know they pay the salaries of several people who are "RedHat employees", but really just kernel hack, but Millions?


    yes. sure, redhat employs kernel devs like alan, ingo and arjen. redhat also pays to employ gcc and gdb developers. and others.

    Really?


    yep.

    For two: They DIDN'T EVEN WRITE THEIR DAMN SOFTWARE.


    really? who wrote rpm then? should you not then lambast mandrake and suse for using rpm, because they didn't write it?

    sure there are legitimate gripes about fedora. that's no reason to make stuff up.
    1. Re:100% FUD by bani · · Score: 3, Informative

      well gee, none of the other distros "wrote" or "contributed" apache, the kernel, mysql, sendmail, ldap or gcc either.

      so I guess debian, gentoo, and all the other distros are just as much "at fault" or "to blame" as redhat?

      or are you saying debian and gentoo or any other distro has individually contributed more money and software to open source than redhat?

      redhat has employed many opensource developers for about 10 years now. it's not hard to see how that could ring up into $millions$.

      like i said, just because you're unaware of something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.