Slashdot Mirror
Fedora 23 Final May Release As Planned On October 27
An anonymous reader writes: Updating a full OS distribution is no small task so it is usually no surprise that even a 5-6 month schedule may tend to get pushed back to address issues. However, the Fedora 23 release schedule made it through the Alpha, Beta and Final freeze periods so far on time. This has been accomplished despite having to address plenty of Alpha Blocker and Beta Blocker bugs. Now all that is left is to clear existing and future Final Blocker bugs in the next two weeks. The release of Fedora 23 will provide some nice incremental updates and should result in the end of life of Fedora 21 around the end of November.
can we now run Gnome3 over VNC without the "Oh No! Something has gone wrong." message?
But blah blah systemd blah blah Why, I've already migrated all of the servers in my basement to FreeBSD but I feel obligated to keep blah blahing about systemd blah blah.
What delayed the May release until October?
A fedora size 23 still does not fit my head: I am eager to know when fedora 24 1/4 is released.
Insert negative comment about Fedora 23 release schedule ;)
After the Plasma 5 fiasco, which wasn't ready for production, really, I took the plunge and switched to Kubuntu 14.04 LTS. It sucks to update your distro every 6 months, and it sucks even more to update distros having the feeling that one is in permanent beta. Nowadays I don't care about "beautiful desktop" and bells and whistles in general, I just need a stable and working environment. Still thinking what to do with wifey's notebook, though. But I'll probably go through the same route.
--------
Fighting the herd since 1985.
Isn't it called CentOS?
No it is called RHEL, which CentOS is based on.
Who ever interacts with the init system on a desktop?
It does not solve your sound or graphics problems or game and application compatibility, and it's arcane enough that you might as well uninstall a daemon instead of disabling it, on the once every two years occurrence you might need to do it.
You need to update _only_ once a year. They support the current and previous version.
When was the last Fedora released on time? 11-22 all had delays
So I'll be updating on october 27th... and if things stay as ugly as they are after the disastrous 20->22 upgrade, I'll be migrating away on october 28th.
Never had a problem and in fact going from Fedora 20 to 21 was incredibly quick (about 45 minutes), likewise going from Fedora 21 to 22. Of course it does help when you keep your system file-systems separate from your user file-systems which I sized allowing room for expansion years ago.
For me to go from Fedora 20 to Fedora 22 would take approx 45 minutes including customization with 20 minutes for additional applications and about an hour for updates. Why? because I don't do upgrades I do a fresh install in my system file-systems keeping in mind that I always document my build so I don't get nasty surprises. You can even change you file-system type (I use ext4) on the fly keeping in mind that if you change your data/user file-systems type then you will have to recover which in my case would take up to 8 hours.
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Fedora really needs a LTS version. I like fedora for its cutting edge features, however its really painful to keep ugrading OS every 6 months. Before the year is over, you have to start worrying about end if life cycle. Even if fedora releases were scheduled for once a year, it would be much better.. At least you will get two years of support. 5-6 month timeline is crazy.
An hour or so of your time approximately every six months for a major release. Please hand in your geek credibility :-)
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Someone who can't get their computer to boot due to detecting a mouse dongle causing the entire init sequence to hang for hours (CentOS7) instead of the old init on the same machine that would just complain and move on if it couldn't work out what to do.
When a system with a rolling release schedule like this _actually_ ships, that's (barely) news because now I can install it. Even more newsworthy is when it misses a release, because then you're plausibly talking about a hard-to-solve problem of some sort. But why would "The planned release will happen on schedule" be news worthy of any sort of general audience? I use Ubuntu, but I don't follow the day-to-day trials of stabilizing the next release because, honestly, it hardly matters which specific version of apache or bash is in there.
Who ever interacts with the init system on a desktop?
It does not solve your sound or graphics problems or game and application compatibility, and it's arcane enough that you might as well uninstall a daemon instead of disabling it, on the once every two years occurrence you might need to do it.
Well, actually, it gets into fights with USB devices and network shares totally blocking booting where earlier releases would simply boot degraded.
Then I get into fights with it, because its version of "single-user" diagnose/repair mode isn't as straightforward as the old-time "runlevel 1" option. Not all of the system resources that runlevel 1 offered are up and available in systemd recovery.
Honestly wondering: there are millions of Linux distributions out there, and we don't get this kind of news for all of them. I know Fedora is one of the biggest in terms of number of users, but still... Besides, this sounds a bit like a non-event: the news doesn't announce anything unexpected, only that things are going according to plan.
Isn't it called CentOS?
Though CentOS/RHEL is targeted much more at business. A lot of recreational stuff only ends up in the Fedora repos because that's what all the home users use.
Personally I stick to Fedora for my home box, I haven't had issues with upgrades and they're pretty easy to perform.
I stole this Sig
I upgraded my laptop from Fedora 20 to Fedora 22 with great difficulty. I do a complete re-install of my OS on its partition, as you note. My main problems were that the wireless did not work during the intall, and that Bluetooth did not work once I was installed. It all is working very nicely now, but I have been running Linux for over twenty years. Fedora 20 could be installed by an ordinary mortal. Fedora 22 requires a second computer with an internet connection, and some geek skills.
Fedora 22 would not recognize the primary hard drive of my desktop. I am thinking hard about Ubuntu. I plan to download Fedora 23 and see if they have fixed it.
I'm with you, haven't had any trouble with it, I'm running Fedora 22 by the way which has had systemd since what? F14? You can even use the old "service" commands if you want because they redirect to systemd.
Well, actually, it gets into fights with USB devices and network shares
What kind of USB devices and network shares?
Then I get into fights with it, because its version of "single-user" diagnose/repair mode isn't as straightforward as the old-time "runlevel 1" option.
Can't you still boot to the "old-time runlevel 1" via adding "single" to the end of the grub boot line at boot?
You haven't noticed that the logs are __binary__?
So run rsyslog - anything logged to journald after rsyslog starts gets written to /var/log/messages - just like before. You can even tweak your unit files to start rsyslog as soon as your disks are mounted.
I've got a fairly large network based on Fedora. Starting from VMs, netbook, notebooks, desktops up to high end 4S Xeon servers.
Some of them have been running Fedora since F12... (Upgraded every six months).
All I can say that F21 to F22 was non-issue (even the upgrade to Plasma 2 / KDE5 didn't really upset my users...)
Gilboa
Sometimes. I've had it work and not work (I've had to use init=/bin/bash quite a few times).
I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.