Slashdot Mirror
Fedora 14 Released and Reviewed — Advanced, and Not For Wimps
Several readers have sent word that Fedora 14, codenamed Laughlin, has been released. A brief listing of the major changes has been posted, and the download is available at the Fedora project's site. Reader jfruhlinger points out a quick review of the new version, saying, "Remember the days when being a Linux user was like being part of a select priesthood — arcane knowledge needed, but great rewards? Steven Vaughan-Nichols has tested out Fedora 14, and that was how it went. No Ubuntu-style handholding, but some powerful new features."
Remember the days when being a Linux user was like being part of a select priesthood ...
Oh, it still is like that in some respects.
My work here is dung.
I've always used KDE with RedHat/Fedora. He needs more friends that run Fedora.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
Reading the comments to that blog shows he reviewed a Beta, not the release. Every single bug he said he ran into had been fixed before the release.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
"Remember the days when being a Linux user was like being part of a select priesthood"
Yeah, i do, and that's why linux is having a hard time converting people because most of the community is desperately trying to keep it that way. And before you call me a windows fanboy, I run it all, win7, mac, several flavors of linux.
He reviewed the Beta version of F14!!! for crying out loud!!! Really thought that Slashdot was more responsible than this.
he reviewed the Beta and all the problems he listed are fixed. Read the comments at the end of TFA.
Sure, I remember those days. Now that I use Linux for real work, with live production servers, and not just screwing around in my bedroom I don't have time for that nonsense. I greatly prefer the more common state of things where the mostly automated configuration is probably pretty close to what I need, but I still have the option to make use of that arcane knowledge to tweak things if I need/want to.
Don't get me wrong, that kind of distro still has its place in the world, but it shouldn't be the standard way of things.
Well, it's like changing a tire, writing your own interrupt handlers, or hand-optimizing memory usage.
It's something everybody should do at least once in their life so they understand the process. And, once you've done it, you will never want to do it again. Those who sidestep the process never really understand and live in fear of it.
Those who understand the process know what it's all about, and just mostly call AAA, install Ubuntu, or add more memory thereafter -- secure in the knowledge that if they really had to, they could probably muddle their way through it. But, in reality, it's a task best left for someone else and is mostly a waste of time. ;-)
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
IME, there are three sorts of Linux users.
The Newbie - uses Ubuntu or something similar - doesn't want to compile anything, just wants something other than Windows with the minimum extra effort.
If you go back in time to before Ubuntu existed, this sort of person was very rare and often graduated to "enthusiast" level quite quickly.
The Enthusiast - uses the unstable, beta stream of a well-known distribution or Gentoo, happy to compile whatever's necessary and will put up with a hell of a lot. For most outsiders, watching these people is like seeing someone in an abusive relationship. You know it doesn't have to be like that, you know they're setting themselves up for punishment but the only person who can pull them out of it is themselves.
The Professional - uses Debian, CentOS or RHEL. Has no intention of wasting time compiling stuff, and wants to be able to get as many packages as possible without any compiling. Is not afraid of compiling if strictly necessary. May have a need to run commercial package(s) which are only supported on these distributions. Usually reached this point having come from some other Unix or bubbled up from the Enthusiast.
Half the article describes his test laptop and the theme he used. Then he didn't get USB3 to work, and suggested you overwrite your modules file (hint: use 2 > characters, not one). Then he complained about the CD burning program. Who burns CDs anymore?
Nothing about SELinux, nothing about filesystems, nothing about updated packages like SSH, Postfix, Bind, or anything.
a better article summary: "Beta Fedora makes a weak desktop, and I didn't bother to try any of the cool features of Linux"
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
Can we get over the quality of the review and celebrate the release of Fedora 14, already? I've been running it since the beta release, and I'm very happy with it. Fedora 14 is another great release by a group of people who are dedicated to Free Software!
From TFA:
This 2008-vintage notebook is powered by a 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor
My server is powered by a Athlon64 3400+ you insensitive clod!
Okay, fine -- I'll post to undo the moderation.
It's four colors, but they're four completely different colors in completely different shapes. The MS Windows logo has red-orange, green, blue, and yellow, in different window-pane-like configurations depending on version. (In older versions, the orange was more red, and the blue and green were darker -- clearly the four perceptual primary colors.)
The Fedora glyphs are a navy blue, a magenta-tinged pink, definitely orange, and bright green. They're decidedly off-primary, and not in the same way that the Windows 7 and other recent MS logos are.
If you think I'm being pedantic, look at them actually side-by-side and you'll see that the comparison is ridiculous.
Surprisingly, Microsoft doesn't actually own the concept of using four colors for a logo. It reminds me of this silliness. So yeah, I thought you were trolling. And I'll give you a half apology, because even if you weren't trolling, it's pretty silly.
bi-curious?
Because, the notion that it's a task that is (or should be) reserved only for the tech wizards is intellectually offensive.
One of my university profs (to whom I owe a great debt of gratitude) had very strong ideas about learning to do such things for yourself, and as a result, understanding more of the context and scope of it. You learn a lot more, and you remember it for longer -- it's not some random fact to be forgotten, it's something that you've internalized and that means something. As a result, when I wrote a microkernel as part of my OS theory class, I really got to understand how an OS works from the bare metal up. Have I done it since? Nope. Not at all. Am I grateful for having done it? Youbetcherass.
I'm not saying that literally everyone should compile a kernel -- my mother, for instance, not so much. But, in terms of demystifying the process, I think it's a valuable thing to learn.
I remember several years ago when my father (at the time in his late 60's, and a computer n00b) came to the conclusion he needed to install a printer driver. The chain of thought to arrive at the conclusion that there is a) such thing as a printer driver, b) you need one to make your printer work, and c) determining the steps to install a printer driver is quite impressive. It represents grasping several concepts before you can even move onto trying to find a solution -- but, in the end, he understood what drivers did (broadly), why we need them, and how to install one.
If you just threw up your hands and said "zomg, that's just way too complicated and therefore beyond me", you're going to curl up in a ball the first time things get difficult.
So, yes, if you consider yourself more than a Linux hobbyist, and just want to give yourself a little more in-depth understanding ... compile a kernel. Break your machine like the rest of us have. Panic. Fix it. At the very least, it demystifies the process ... and on the other hand, forces you to understand at least at a high level that there are such things as kernels and drivers, but that it's not some arcane magic.
Now, get off my damned lawn and go compile a kernel or something. ;-)
Lost at C:>. Found at C.