Fedora 21 Beta Released

An anonymous reader writes: The Fedora Project has been critical to the development Red Hat Enterprise Linux — RHEL version 7 was largely based off Fedora version 19. Fedora is continuing to evolve with the announcement of Fedora 21 Beta, now available from the Fedora Project website. To make the release ready for Beta testing required addressing 50 beta blocker bugs. If the Fedora Project developers are able to keep up with the final release blocker bugs, then Fedora 21 is expected to be released on December 9th. As a result, support for Fedora 19 is expected to end around the beginning of 2015. Released back in July 2013, Fedora 19 will have been supported for over 540 days by 2015. Previously, the longest a Fedora release was supported was Fedora Core 5 at 469 days. Users of Fedora 19 will be encouraged to upgrade to Fedora 20 or 21 to continue to get critical updates.

Comments

beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

Next week: systemd announces integration of drugs.

Re:beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[tlambert]

Next week: systemd announces integration of drugs.

Beta blockers are for reducing blood pressure; systemd is for raising it. };-)

Re:beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[wangmaster]

You know what amuses me about all this systemd hate.
Fedora was the first distro to go systemd by default back in F15. There were a few growing pains, but there wasn't the coordinated systemd hatred until pretty much recently when RHEL7 went out the door and debian said we're going systemd.

I know Fedora isn't as popular a distro as some others but it still seems amusing to me.

Re:beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the usual complaints about systemd are hilarious hypocritical. X.org, Emacs, GCC, KDE/Gnome/Whatever, etc. all violate the "Unix philosophy" by doing far more than one thing and yet strangely the frothing-at-the-mouth systemd haters are silent when it comes to criticizing said software for the same reason. Nor have any forks of Debian been threatened over those and numerous other pieces of included software that violate the same "philosophy".

Re:beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[unrtst]

What if one doesn't want to use systemd for init, but still wants logind and/or systemd-dbus?

You don't. Just like you can't use XRender without an X11 implementation.

So you can, since you could use XFree86 or Xorg or Kdrive and probably others.

Re:beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[raxx7]

You can try and use them. But a modern X desktop on anything but Xorg's Xserver is untested and unsupported. If it works at all.
Effectively, modern X desktops depend on Xorg's Xserver as the others (XFree86, Kdrive) lag too behind in development.

Regarding your first question.
A number of distributions (including RHEL6) used systemd-logind without running systemd as init.
However, to do so with a modern kernel, you need to implement systemd' cgroup proxy functionality.
Ubuntu has done just that, in the form of cgmanager, as they plan to use upstrart for a few more releases before migrating to systemd.

If you don't run systemd as init, you can use the good old dbus-daemon.

Like Xorg's Xserver, systemd provides features that developers/maintainers want to exploit.
And those developer maintainers are not willing to put in the extra work needed to achieve their goals without those features.
And although there's a very vocal outcry against systemd, it's not being translated into actual work to provide those features, only into complains and demands that others stop depending on systemd.

Re: beta blockers? what have they smoked?

[jc79]

Yep. Nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to use a systemd based distro. You can always roll your own. THe software is free and out there. Nobody is going to take the source code for SysV init from you. You have complete and utter freedom to use whatever software you want. Just don't expect your favourite distro to bend over backwards just to please you.

Re:Why be a guinea pig for Red Hat?

[juanfgs]

And to be fair, Fedora is rock solid as a workstation. At least for me it has been the least complicated distro to install, upgrading one time per year on my desktop and each 6 months in my laptop.

You have to get used to change, but if you are a developer not concerned with learning a few new things every year it's ok.

It should receive some more love on the desktop side, it's getting unintuitive for beginners.

Re:"Blocker bugs" - just ignore them like Ubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

Geezus, you're an idiot. How long did you search before found a bug bash Ubuntu with?

1. The bug report is from January and 14.04 was still in Alpha. Guess what? Alpha software is fucking buggy, just ask your Fedora friends.
2. The upgrade problem had to do with only those systems that had Ubuntu's hardware enablement stack enabled. Most don't.
3. Ubuntu's official policy for LTS to LTS upgrades is to wait until xx.xx.1 version is released. 14.04.1 was released near the end of July. Upgrading 12.04.5 with HWE to 14.04.1 was a fucking cinch.

Leave it to Fedora fucks to bash another distribution to try and deflect the fact that despite the support of Red Hat, Fedora devs still can't meet their delivery deadlines.

Re:"Blocker bugs" - just ignore them like Ubuntu

[iggymanz]

So why didn't you first go to 12.04.5 and then to 14.04 with no issues like you were supposed to. Instead you whine about jumping from a weird start point. The biggest blocker bug is between your ears. Linux made it as my desktop years ago, it's obvious what your problem is.

Re:Why be a guinea pig for Red Hat?

[Gavagai80]

There's less difference between sponsoring and owning when Red Hat employees do a lot of the Fedora work.