Slashdot Mirror


Fedora 16 Released

Karrde712 writes "Fedora 16 has just been released, bringing with it Gnome 3.2, KDE 4.7, GRUB2 and more!" Here are the full release notes; most users will probably want to jump to the list of changes for desktop users.

125 comments

  1. With Gnome 3 by allo · · Score: 0, Troll

    so forget it.

    1. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... because it's just UNPOSSIBLE to put whatever desktop environment you want on it. I'm waiting for Beefy Miracle just for the sake of the name.

    2. Re:With Gnome 3 by allo · · Score: 1

      i thought fedora releasenames are quite cool. but beefy miracle is just silly. All versions before had a nice sounding codename, and now something that silly. i wonder what they put up next, they need to have a similiarity with the previous one (the beefy miracle) there.

      on the rest ... yeah, kde on fedora is pretty much okay. other (more minimalistic) WMs of course, too.

    3. Re:With Gnome 3 by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      ... because it's just UNPOSSIBLE to put whatever desktop environment you want on it.

      Given a choice between installing Random Distro X and having to build and install a completely new desktop environment or installing Random Distro Y which is sane out of the box, why would anyone pick the former?

    4. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sudo yum install kde

    5. Re:With Gnome 3 by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ok, if you insist.

      Fedora has nearly always been extremely quick (sometimes too much so) to adopt new software and features. It would be shocking if they didn't have Gnome 3. Most of the time, this means Fedora is the most technically advanced major Linux distro. It also makes it one of the buggiest. Don't use it if you don't want to play around with cutting edge new Linux software (versions). Simple as that.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    6. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said anything about "build"? 1. Open package manager. 2. Select desktop meta-package 3. Reboot, select DE at login screen. All done, no "build" involved. Or wait a coupla days for a respin in the de you want. You're giving Gnome 2 users a bad name, whether your ignorance is rhetorical or real. Oh, and "completely new desktop environment" ? Gnome 2x is old, as in completely old. That doesn't mean it's bad, but does mean that it isn't new, and most certainly not "completely new".

    7. Re:With Gnome 3 by drjones78 · · Score: 1

      sudo yum groupinstall XFCE
      sudo yum groupinstall LXDE


      Or just use Gnome 3 - I've never heard so much irrational complaining over what is a pretty solid (and very customizable) desktop etc....

    8. Re:With Gnome 3 by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

      yum groupinstall Xfce
      or KDE, or LXDE, or...
      really now... so hard...

    9. Re:With Gnome 3 by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Or just use Gnome 3 - I've never heard so much irrational complaining over what is a pretty solid (and very customizable) desktop
      etc....

      Can you put a system monitor on that bar that runs across the top to display processor usage per core, temperature per core, processor frequency per core and ram in use?

      If you can, without adding some third party repo, let me know how. I'm running XFCE4 and Trinity, but neither seems as complete or polished as Gnome2.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    10. Re:With Gnome 3 by FunkyELF · · Score: 1

      XFCE and LXDE don't have all the administration tools that Gnome3 has. No utility to configure fingerprint readers (my laptop has one) for example.

    11. Re:With Gnome 3 by drjones78 · · Score: 1

      sudo yum install gnome-shell-extension-cpu-temperature

      Not sure that takes care of all your requirements, but it gets you at least somewhat there.
      Fedora packages a lot of extensions for gnome-shell - I expect that the number and quality of them will only get better and better.

    12. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fedora 15 had gnome 3 as well. Might as well stop trolling.

    13. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway of doing a groupinstall for Gnome2?

    14. Re:With Gnome 3 by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      so forget it.

      So just install KDE already. KDE 4.x has been usable for years.

      In any case, this is reason enough for me to start performing Fedora installs:
      http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Release_Notes/sect-Release_Notes-Changes_for_Sysadmin.html#id1439594
      That means seamless user sharing between F16 and Debian-based distros.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    15. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      kheres kome khing kbout kde khat kust kothers khe khit kut kf ke.

    16. Re:With Gnome 3 by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      Beefy miracle is F17.
      F16 is called Verne (hence the underwater wallpaper)

      --
      -- no sig today
    17. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, I will ride Gnome fallback (2.9xx) until fedor 17 then i'll switch to LXDE. Screw those PowerPook onwing OSX using developers at the GNOME foundation. GNOME will wither and die. Infiltrate the gnome foundation with rogue programmers and make the gui un-usable for any thing but watching movies (check), start a half-hearted attempt at forking GNOME 2.x which will eventually merge with GNOME 3 (mate). Witness the beginning of the rise of LXDE as the most popular gui.

    18. Re:With Gnome 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XFCE and LXDE don't have all the administration tools that Gnome3 has. No utility to configure fingerprint readers (my laptop has one) for example.

      Most administration tools are just gui over command line utilities anyway.
      For the moment use the command line utilities, in the future I'm sure some entreprising soul will make a graphic front end that doesn't depend on gnome.

    19. Re:With Gnome 3 by haruchai · · Score: 1

      That's not due until May 2012 so let's hope they change it - it's really dumb. But it might boost their popularity in Texas

      --
      Pain is merely failure leaving the body
    20. Re:With Gnome 3 by fnj · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's undeniably getting there. It will take time, but it's getting there. Take a gander at what Linux Mint did with Gnome3 using extensions. Sure looks like it's gonna work as good as Gome2 to me. Never thought I would be saying this as early as this. I didn't have high expectations at all.

    21. Re:With Gnome 3 by kramulous · · Score: 3, Informative

      Doesn't quite meet you requirements, but let's hope it does soon. You probably know about it but anyway : Try this

      I find that it is a bit hit and miss on machines (not always works) but when it does, it works well.

      --
      .
    22. Re:With Gnome 3 by unixisc · · Score: 1

      How does that pick b/w kde 3.5 vs 4.7?

    23. Re:With Gnome 3 by armanox · · Score: 1

      Because to install 3.5.x (as Trinity) you need to add a seperate repository, then yum install trinity-desktop.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    24. Re:With Gnome 3 by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      I thought it was because of Ernest T Worrell! (Hey Vern!) Installing it now in a VM to test it out...

    25. Re:With Gnome 3 by justforgetme · · Score: 1

      here is the quantification: fedora names

      --
      -- no sig today
  2. Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Informative

    It should be noted in the article.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who?

    2. Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie by Enderandrew · · Score: 2

      Dennis Richie co-invented the C programing language and Unix. He also wrote the definitive C programing book of its time.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    3. Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He... oh never mind. He didn't run Apple so who gives a shit.

  3. Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation by tepples · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the problem with GNOME 3 is that GNOME 2 will no longer have the support of the GNOME Foundation behind its continued development, and it might take too long to build up the financial wherewithal to establish a Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation.

    1. Re:Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation by keitosama · · Score: 1

      GNOME 2 has been forked as MATE by an Argentinian weeaboo, but it's still in a very early stage without much else than code migration and rebranding going on at the moment. Maybe more contributors will join in and help build a proper infrastructure for the project later, time will tell.

    2. Re:Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation by Tolleman · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be better to do more job on the fallback mode then to keep going on GNOME 2? Granted, GNOME 3 has some annoying dependencies. But the removal of bonobo and so on are rather nice pros.

    3. Re:Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation by notamisfit · · Score: 1

      Fallback mode seems to be going away soon.

      --
      Jesus is coming -- look busy!
  4. Grub2? by ichthus · · Score: 2

    They're actually listing grub2 as an UPGRADE?

    --
    sig: sauer
    1. Re:Grub2? by Skapare · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just wait until GRUB3 comes out. You won't even need to boot an OS with that. The question is whether GRUB3 will include Xfce or just be GNOME only.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:Grub2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GRUB3+GNOME+EMACS takes care of all your OS needs.

    3. Re:Grub2? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      They're actually listing grub2 as an UPGRADE?

      Start a new bootloader project and call it GRUB3 and people will just switch to it because it has a bigger number.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:Grub2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck it, we're doing GRUB5!!

    5. Re:Grub2? by greed · · Score: 1

      GRUB2 is certainly an upgrade for EFI-based systems. I had to download and build my own copy of GRUB2 to run Fedora from an external USB disk on a Mac. (The Bootcamp BIOS emulation thing only allows use of the first internal disk. And it means you're still dealing with BIOS.)

      The GRUB2 BIOS systems I'm running seem to behave themselves, but that's only a couple of test VMs.

    6. Re:Grub2? by John+Bresnahan · · Score: 1

      I'm going to do Grub11...

      Because it's one more!

    7. Re:Grub2? by StarHeart · · Score: 1

      I hear you, it does feel like a downgrade. On the other hand, grub1 is not working for me. I upgraded to Fedora 16 last night. At first GRUB2 gave me simply "GRUB", and GRUB1 gave me "Error 16". I tried multiple tricks to get GRUB1 working, and was unsuccessful. What I finally ended up having to do was use GRUB and make the empty space at the beginning of the drive 2047 blocks instead of the previous 62. To do this I had to backup the contents of /boot, repartition, redo raid1, format it, and copy the data back.

      I also recently ran into the Error 16 error with GRUb1 on Fedora 15 on my mail/web server. To workaround it I ended up installing GRUB2 from Fedora 16.

      --
      Havoc Penington, the bane of my Linux desktop.
    8. Re:Grub2? by notandor · · Score: 1

      After reading the Fedora 16 release notes and the info that Fedora 16 uses GPT (GUID Partition Table) instead of the old MBR style, i am rather confused.

      It seems that on all non-UEFI systems (like my Thinkpad T510), a separate, small 1 MB "BIOS Boot Partition" needs to be created, which is not the same as a partition on /boot.

      Is this extra "BIOS Boot Partition" partition really necessary on non-UEFI machines? Why cant we use /boot for that?

    9. Re:Grub2? by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Why, has Mozilla taken over ownership of Grub?

    10. Re:Grub2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no problem with grub2 on the F16 partition. I had grub1 installed on my boot partition and just chain load F16'S grub2. My other desktop is a dual boot Win7/F16 setup, and grub2 installed to the mbr without problems

    11. Re:Grub2? by AdamWill · · Score: 1

      Well...we actually don't use grub2 for EFI, because grub2-efi tested out to be really buggy. if you do an EFI install of F16 you get grub-legacy.

      (In hindsight that was a bad call because it made all manner of things way more complex than they should be, but hey, hindsight is 20/20, right?)

      we'll go grub2 for EFI whenever it stops sucking so much. probably F17 or F18.

    12. Re:Grub2? by AdamWill · · Score: 1

      "Is this extra "BIOS Boot Partition" partition really necessary on non-UEFI machines?"

      Yes.

      "Why cant we use /boot for that?"

      BIOS boot partition replaces the empty space behind the MBR on MS-DOS labelled partitions, where bootloaders used to expand themselves. You can't use /boot because the BIOS boot partition exists *for the convenience of the bootloader* - i.e. it's part of the bootloader, really, not part of the installed OS. You only need one no matter how many OSes (and /boot partitions) you have.

    13. Re:Grub2? by AdamWill · · Score: 2

      That's https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737508 .

      Frankly, we rather feel grub2 is something of a downgrade too. Or at least an unnecessary pain in the ass. Fedora isn't going to grub2 because we think it's way better than grub - we don't. Fedora's going to grub2 because it's what upstream supports, and we're tired of having an entire person who does nothing but keep grub-legacy working now upstream doesn't care about it any more.

  5. Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by Nighttime · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fedora torrents are located here.

    --
    I've got a fever and the only prescription is more COBOL.
    1. Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by IMightB · · Score: 1

      Damn leachers, I'm getting 700k up and I'm only at 74%

    2. Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by IMightB · · Score: 1

      Sorry html formatting snafu, should be -lt 200k down and -gt 700k

    3. Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by jandrese · · Score: 1

      I'm getting 24mbps down and only putting 4mbps up right now. It's not because my connection is asymmetric either, there is just an overabundance of seeders on the 64bit DVD torrent.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I noticed the torrent was up last night and got it early... now I'm serving up avg. 80 Mb/s from my workstation but may have to shut it down after lunch (PST), assuming nobody at work gets cranky before then.

      Too bad bittorrent-ncurses forgets its stats every time I restart it with a different upload cap. Not sure how much I've served total in the last 12 hours, but latest run is about 80GB in the last 3 hours.

    5. Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Total download time was 17:30. Still only uploading at ~2.4mbps despite having plenty of bandwidth available. Looks to me like the torrent is pretty well seeded at this point.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  6. Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by Skapare · · Score: 2

    ,,, were it not for Gnome by default. But I've yet to see anything (and it would take a lot, so I'm not expecting it) to overcome their overly short support cycles. I need something better to use this at work, for either the desktops (we only use Windows where there is absolutely no other choice, which makes a grand total of 2) or the servers (0). But even Ubuntu's slow (in some cases) security updates are starting to bother me (over an issue they haven't yet updated in my one-version-behind system even though Slackware fixed the same one over a month ago in versions all the way back to 2007).

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    1. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by mx+b · · Score: 1

      Personally I like OpenSUSE. Not quite as fast a release cycle but enough to keep up. Terrific KDE implementation (which is the default) and you can find package repos for nearly anything, and they update issues very rapidly. Just this morning it updated me to Firefox 8, before 8 was even listed on Mozilla's website. I had no idea it was released yet! They're really on top of things and can't wait for their next release next week.

    2. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by drjones78 · · Score: 1

      Try a distro that tracks with RHEL, like CentOS or Scientific Linux? Or there's always vanilla debian.

    3. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, or RHEL itself.

    4. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by fnj · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because it's REALLY hard to type "yum install kde-desktop" (package spelling might be a bit off on this release, but it's as simple as that) and get a coffee.

    5. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, you can download another spin (KDE / XFCE) if you want a default DE other than GNOME -- or god forbid, use the package manager.

    6. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      But I've yet to see anything (and it would take a lot, so I'm not expecting it) to overcome their overly short support cycles.

      if support cycles are important, then Fedora isn't for you. It's intended to be the latest, cutting-edge software which itself takes so much time and energy to put together that supporting older versions becomes a drain on newer version development. It's essentially Red Hat's public test lab, and one of the reasons that they don't formally support upgrading between distros (especially not in cases like F16 where so much of the support architecture has changed in one release).

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    7. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, get the KDE spin, and you won't have any residual gnome cruft left over from the switch.

    8. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because it's REALLY hard to type "yum install kde-desktop" (package spelling might be a bit off on this release, but it's as simple as that) and get a coffee.

      Well if you got the DVD (3.7GB - best if you have two or more machines to upgrade) you could just tick the KDE check-box if you want and install both. Of course if you don't want Gnome you can un-tick the Gnome check-box. As for creating a DVD I normally create a boot-able install USB which is very portable, does not scratch and I can reuse it again for the next release or even other things.

      Even if you do a DVD/USB install you will still need to type "yum update" (as root of course) or the use the GUI update tool and since you are using presto most downloads are going to be Delta RPM's (ie. drpm) which are considerably smaller than the full package.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    9. Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... by donaldm · · Score: 1

      It is surprisingly easy to do a fresh installation of Fedora over a previous Fedora (takes about an hour). In fact if you have your file-system laid out properly (ie. /boot, /, /usr, /var, /tmp and swap) with separate file-systems for /home and other file-systems such as say /archive or others that are not system related then if you are using LVM you only need to format the system file-systems. Personally I only have two partitions for my system disk the first being /boot and the other an LVM group (in my case I call it vg_machine_name) with appropriately named volumes such as lv_root, lv_usr, lv_var, lv... well you get the picture. Of course a backup should be performed first but you will only need this if you stuff up the new installation by clobbering your non system logical volumes.

      As for your extras it is very important to document them prior to doing the install. Once you do this you need only use the "yum install {package}" command or GUI if you wish. In addition as far as users go you should not have that many so it is best to manually (UID's have changed) add them but don't recreate their directories since they should already be in /home (or wherever you put them) . Then when you finish adding your users, as root change the user's ownership and group of their home directories (ie. "chown -R"). Also add any groups that may be required. In most cases Fedora user's use DHCP which is the default however if you need routes then you should have documented them. This is why I backup my root file-system to somewhere where I can quickly access it in case I have forgotten something.

      Of course you can always do an upgrade but this does take a few hours, however this I would only recommend for novices and even then you may find some packages fail because they could have come form different repos and don't work with the updated packages.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  7. More fixing of things that weren't broken by Trix · · Score: 1

    GNOME 3, systemd, autokey, just to name a few. Now they're saying that everything belongs in /usr/bin.

    Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to re-invent it, badly. Evidently, as Fedora.

    Maybe I'm just getting too old for this, but I'd rather have improvements in the tools that work than to have to learn a completely new tool every year because somebody decided that the old way is wrong because they didn't invent it. I guess Vim will be on the block next.

    Are we, as a community, absolutely certain that "release early, release often" is always the best way to go?

    --
    I want all of the power and none of the responsibility.
    1. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      If you don't like people moving things around, just be glad you never tried GoboLinux. Personally I quite like it, but you do have to negotiate a completely new system tree. Moving things into /usr/bin is tame in comparison.

    2. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by qualityassurancedept · · Score: 1

      You don't have to upgrade at all, of course. If your system works and you have no problem with it, then you can just keep what you have.

      --
      if your life is such a big joke then why should I care?
    3. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by IMightB · · Score: 2

      I'll bet you still have DrDOS and Windows for Workgroups with MS BOB on your servers.

    4. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by fatboy · · Score: 1

      You do understand the reason why we have a /usr/bin and /usr/sbin , right?

      --
      --fatboy
    5. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      systemd is a huge step forward. sysvinit and BSD-style init aren't exactly the pinnacles of design and neither of them cope well with parallelization. On top of that, cgroups support, socket activation, snapshotting, and dependency-based service control are huge wins. As a BSD user, systemd is one of the few features I'm actually jealous of. It's nice to see RedHat pushing interesting technologies because the only other interesting technology coming out of the Linux community is BTFRS.

    6. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by reub2000 · · Score: 1

      This is Fedora. When accused of being a testbed for RHEL, their devs respond by claiming that no Fedora is a testbed for much more. Fedora has never claimed to offer a stable desktop system, so I don't know why you'd complain it not providing a stable desktop system.

    7. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are we, as a community, absolutely certain that "release early, release often" is always the best way to go?

      It only makes sense if you release your distribution with the understanding that it is nothing more than an extended testing platform for various technologies you hope to incorporate into your enterprise product within a few years.

    8. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because most 'nix users are still living in the 1970's?

    9. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No

    10. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by StuffMaster · · Score: 1

      MS BOB on a server...that seriously makes me LOL.

      LOLBOB.

    11. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Troll... ... or just in case you're not:

      1. you never had to quickly restore a production DB by shoving the /var disk set into another server haven't you?
      2. yen never had to painstakingly twiddle a broken server using statically linked /bin /sbin, binaries?

      Kids these days, they think all there is to UNIX is a LAMP image on the Cloud...

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    12. Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing for changing from splitting into /sbin and /bin - I was just mentioning a Linux with far more extreme changes than those that Fedora make, mainly for interest's sake. I've got no issue with keeping /usr/bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin and /usr/local/bin separate, though I must admit it's not something that keeps me awake at night. (Likewise anything under /opt/bin, /opt/local/bin, or any other binary directory you choose to include.)

  8. quick tip by nimbius · · Score: 1

    for those upgrading via preupgrade, make sure to have at least 70% free space in boot or it will fail with an out of space error on the reboot.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:quick tip by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the heads up. This is a stupid bug to have, but in my experience Anaconda and preupgrade fail about as often as they work.

      --

      If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

    2. Re:quick tip by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      My /boot is 485MB with 83% free, do you think that will be enough, because pre-upgrade failed for the F14 to F15 preupgrade for me.

    3. Re:quick tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I upgraded a Dell Inspiron Mini10 using preupgrade, Fedora 15 to Fedora 16. After downloading packages, Fedora will reboot. When booting the upgrade OS option in grub, you will have to wait about 2-3 minutes before you get a visual response. I rebooted once thinking it was not working

    4. Re:quick tip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It worked for me with 41% used

  9. BTRFS default didn't make it in? by mynis01 · · Score: 1

    I don't see anything in the release notes, I thought buterfase was supposed to be the default file system in F16?

    1. Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? by allo · · Score: 1

      it was, but due to a incomplete fsck.btrfs, they decided against it.

    2. Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? by heson · · Score: 1

      It will be default when more people trust it. Currently not enough do, I have tried it (some time ago) and at that time it was very slow and failed horrible when the laptop ran out of battery. Fedora has a history of making us hate stuff becuase they force it upon us before its ready, yum, networkmanager (still not solid, horrible on anything but a laptop), gnome3 (a joke), pulseaudio (awesome now, was not), biosdevname (horay, the nic can now have _any_ name depending on bios so every script referencing eth0 will now have a long fucking oneliner there, not even a tool to help) Please do not put btrfs in the same situation. Anyone with backup of their data en a spare computer to use while reinstalling can use experimental filesystems if they like.

    3. Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was, but due to a incomplete fsck.btrfs, they decided against it.

      Thank goodness. Right now, btrfs fails miserably under certain workloads. Until it's fixed, you definitely don't want to run VM images off of btrfs, or run apt-get (yum doesn't have the same problem though).

    4. Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still not stable. I've been trying it periodically since 2008 and my latest tests last month on CentOS 6cr and Fedora 15 yielded kernel panics and corrupted filesystems from just basic stuff like rsyncing data into it until full, or creating and then deleting a few dozen snapshots in a shell loop.

  10. Gnome3 a deal breaker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not exactly a newbie; I've run every release of Fedora since the beginning, and compiled my own RH distributions before that - I'm one of the original RHCEs (Feb 2000). Like most people, I was very shocked and frustrated when F15 came out with Gnome3 and found that I lost a lot of functionality because of the new desktop that is being geared towards tablets and ignores the rest of us. At least with the fallback mode and some add ons I could get close to previous functionality, but the app bar is long gone. My temptation at the time was to fall back to F14. I've learned my lesson, I won't automatically upgrade, but load to a VM first.

    1. Re:Gnome3 a deal breaker by armanox · · Score: 1

      That's what I've done - stayed on F14. I'm planning on checking out 16, but, I don't like a lot of the changes they've been making (systemctl can DIAF).

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  11. I must admit systemd rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I may be a gnome(3) hating "refusenik" curmudgeon, even I have to admit that systemd seriously rocks. It's a massive step forward and very unix friendly. It even has excellent man pages (something nothing fedora has added this decade except selinux has)

  12. Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 by Nivag064 · · Score: 2


    Applefication (The doctrine that designers know better than users, and that users should not worry their tiny little minds about how to configure something to be useful for them) of desktops and applications may be fine for Sheeple, but not for people who want to get the most out of their desktops.
    GNOME 3 is a total disaster, it is simply unworkable for people who actually want to do serious work - unless your use of a computer is somewhat trivial and you're happy with what appears to be something that seems to be based on a mobile phone interface for large screens.

    GNOME 3 is a triumph of fashion over functionality.

    As Linus, and others have said, xfce is better than GNOME 3, but not as good as GNOME 2.

    What are they smoking? Were they bought out by Apple or Microsoft???

    1. Re:Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 by dmbasso · · Score: 0

      I had a similar opinion before I started using Gnome 3. Now I know that Gnome 3 is all about extensibility. They are in the right path, IMHO.

      That said, I agree that right now it really sucks.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    2. Re:Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 by allo · · Score: 1

      just like KDE 4.0.

      KDE4 is good since 4.2 or something like this.

    3. Re:Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      Indeed, it is looking good. I'm installing it right now. Perhaps it will be my DE while GNOME 3 sucks. After two weeks using it, the bugs and lack of features are starting to really get on my nerves.

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
  13. wrong by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    you will have all manner of problems if you still have GNOME and its files around. the proper way would be to uninstall GNOME desktop and erase all the dot files that could fuck xfce up, and there are a few. I tried Fedora as one possibility to fleeing ubuntu, but quite frankly the alternative desktops either aren't as well stocked for serious admin of the machine, or have conflicts

    1. Re:wrong by fnj · · Score: 1

      Maybe. But funny thing - I did just that in the past without any problems.

    2. Re:wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have both installed and use Xfce with absolutely no problems. I've done this on Debian and Fedora without a single issue.

    3. Re:wrong by nirik · · Score: 1

      Not the case. Many people have GNOME/KDE/Xfce/LXDE installed. Simply select which you wish to use on login...

    4. Re:wrong by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      it is the case, things in .config .local and .X* can cause problems. I've seen this going from ubuntu to xubuntu, fedora GNOME to xfce, debian with gnome to xfce

    5. Re:wrong by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

      Funny. I have Gnome installed without issue. I will grant you I have never logged into it, so no dot files in my homedir, but otherwise no issue. I use NetworkManager, gnome-bluetooth, and gnome-audio-control (do not like the Xfce applet) in the notification area, so I can't fully uninstall gnome, For some reason I think at least one requires gnome-session, so I can get about as far as removing gnome-session-xsession so it does not show up as an option in LXDM.

    6. Re:wrong by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

      and so, since I just noticed your comment, frankly, you're wrong...

  14. ever try it, or you just post what you THINK works by iggymanz · · Score: 0

    nope, certain gnome dot files will screw up xfce4. you'd have to remove GNOME desktop first, and then delete some dot files in home directory. the truth is that fedora is geared to about two desktops and xfce isn't one

  15. Re:Linux is dead! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like you Netcraft is a Troll. So get on your troll-cycle and be off with you.

  16. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by fnj · · Score: 1

    Uh, yeah, I tried it in other Fedora releases, and didn't happen to run into those problems. I could log into Xfce, Gnome, KDE, and LXDE in turn using a login selector without any problems.

  17. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by nirik · · Score: 1

    I can't imagine any case where this would happen.

    Have you reported any bugs on it? Not against Fedora Xfce apparently, since I've never seen them (I'm one of the Fedora Xfce maintainers).

  18. Still not so sure by ossuary · · Score: 1

    Fed16 smells a bit too Unity-ish for me. The desktop is being further relegated to nothing more than wallpaper and not a productive space (not storage space mind you!). I feel like at this point the Gnome 2 look and feel is gone with the larger distros. The king is dead; long live the king. I am giving Mint a try, but their 12.x plans to produce a hybrid Gnome 2 + 3 environment sounds like a clustersmack waiting to happen. Sigh. I think I miss right-clicking for Properties most of all.

    1. Re:Still not so sure by EkriirkE · · Score: 1

      I forget what option I turned off in Gnome3 to get my productivity back, but I think it had to do with turning "acceleration" off in preferences. After that you get your icons and menus back, but you're unable to change the theme (its stuck on grey on black)

      --
      from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
      to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
  19. Now with Kermit! by kriston · · Score: 1

    Since Kermit has been embroiled in some rather obscure licensing issues over the years, from the project's name to the open-source license, I was surprised to see ckermit included in Fedora at all. As it turns out, Columbia University shut down the Kermit project earlier this year. Kermit is now really open-source. http://www.kermitproject.org/

    --

    Kriston

  20. Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by cswiii · · Score: 1

    If you use nvidia drivers with Fedora -- or at very least, do so with the aid of rpmfusion -- you may want to hold off on upgrading to F16.

    To see if you should wait, run the following command:

    nvidia-settings -q AccelerateTrapezoids

    If you get nothing returned (or more accurately, two CRLFs), you will probably want to hold off on upgrading F15 -> F16. Looks like there is a bug in the nvidia drivers which can cause some pretty severe performance degradation.

    Specifically, any card that can't handle trapezoid acceleration will suffer due to this regression. And to put it in perspective, my GT240, which is not ancient doesn't support this. So it's pretty bad.

    More details: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=166698

    It /is/ apparently fixed in the 290.06 driver - but that's not in rpmfusion yet.

    1. Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by dstyle5 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the heads up. I have a box with a 8800GT in it that I plan on upgrading so I may have gotten hit by this too. After getting bitten with Fedora 10 not working with my older ATI-based system I no longer upgrade day 1 in order to avoid stuff like this.

    2. Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the heads up. I put F16 on a VM tonight; Apper doesn't work (hangs on "waiting for service to start") but that may only be in KDE. I purposely didn't install the GNOME 3 DE. Back to Mint, until SUSE 12.1 on the 16th....

    3. Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by sphantom · · Score: 1

      I didn't get the warning in time and upgraded. Turns out I'm affected and hadn't even nailed down the issue until I saw your post. It not HORRIBLE per se, but it is mildly annoying. It manifests itself as a momentary system lock up, kind of like what happens when you run out of RAM and start swapping to disk. It's not continuous, there are periods of heavy occurrance, and of light occurrance.

      Should be fixed soon it sounds like. It's tolerable for that period of time.

    4. Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the record, I installed 290.06 beta directly from nvidia's .run file, and it fixed some of the CPU spikes I was getting, but "nvidia-settings -q AccelerateTrapezoids" still shows nothing.

    5. Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 by cswiii · · Score: 1

      You won't get anything if your GPU doesn't support it. The bug in question was causing any GPU that doesn't support AccelerateTrapezoids to revert to non-accelerated mode, IIRC.

  21. Is MATE still alive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A good few sites are saying that after a burst of enthusiasm, the project seems to have stalled.

  22. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by iggymanz · · Score: 0

    guess you don't read the fedora forums, then

  23. Typical \. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bitch Bitch Bitchy Bitch
    You don't like it don't use it and STFU
    WTF! SOSO........8*)

  24. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by AdamWill · · Score: 1

    most developers don't read forums, as they're incredibly inefficient; just keeping up with Bugzilla is enough work. so if you want a dev to see your issue, file it as a bug, not a forum post.

  25. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by nirik · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Although in this case, I do in fact read the forums. ;) ( if you are talking about fedoraforum?).

    I don't recall seeing any such bug.

    As Adam notes, filing an actual bug is much more likely to get folks attention, but if you note your forum post I'd be happy to reply to you there too.

  26. Look elsewhere for a Linux distro by Cherubim1 · · Score: 1

    rpm = really poor package management. Cloud computing services ? Are they nuts ? Cloud computing is a security nightmare and I shudder to think what bonehead corporations and individuals are willing to sacrifice the privacy of their data to faceless entities.

    1. Re:Look elsewhere for a Linux distro by donaldm · · Score: 1

      rpm = really poor package management.

      You don't normally use "rpm" much less "deb" packages as is unless you know what the package dependences are. This is why you use "yum" for managing "rpm" packages and "apt-get" for managing "deb" packages and if you want you can use "alien" to translate between "deb" and "rpm". Of course you can always download the source and try to compile it. if you don't like that then MS Windows will welcome you back with "All is forgiven, just don't do it again" and promptly give you a blue (green if you have Win 8) screen of death. :)

      Cloud computing is only remote storage and access and has been around in many different forms since at least the 1960's. Of course "Cloud Computing" sounds so much better (ie. shiny) to the "unwashed masses" or the corporate "pointy haired manager", who's attitude is "But the Cloud takes care of all of that so we don't have to think about it".

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  27. Its more disappointing than Fedora 15. by lsatenstein · · Score: 2

    The welcome screen is a big black blob of window, and the interface is no better than Fedora 15. The net benefit is the newer kernel. My first efforts with newer software versions, met with failed to launch, and bugzilla core dumps being forwarded.

    Here is an interesting idea for an improvement. In the bottom right corner, allow the gnome 2 desktop switcher to appear. It allows us with one click to move from desktop to desktop with a single click, and allows Gnome3 to please the email/internet users.

    --
    Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  28. Nothing wrong with CentOS 6 for work desktops by rklrkl · · Score: 1

    Now that there's a continuous repository for CentOS 6, it's a pretty obvious Linux desktop to use in a work environment. It means GNOME 2, Sys V init scripts (i.e. stuff that works!) and updates for 7 years. If you're like me, you'll maintain a handful of packages manually (I have scripts to create RPMs of the latest Firefox and Thunderbird, plus I install the latest LibreOffice too), but with useful repos like EPEL, RPMforge and ELrepo filling in the remaining gaps, it's a pretty stable setup and a much more sensible choice than Fedora for a work desktop.

    Bonus point: You can run the exactly the same OS on your desktop and servers! Even Windows can't do that...

  29. Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    the forums have solution of removal of certain dot files, to cure the problem. thus it may not even constitute "bug" so much as "interference" between packages that use same configuration files.