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.
I run it all, win7, mac, several flavors of linux.
Watch it polytheist, the Solders of the One will mod bomb you.
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.
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?