Slashdot Mirror
Fedora 24 Featuring GNOME 3.20, Tons Of Improvements Released (betanews.com)
After several delays, the Fedora Project on Tuesday released Fedora 24 (download link), the latest version of its Linux-based operating system. Fedora 24 brings with it a number of interesting features and changes, including the GNOME 3.20 desktop environment. The latest version of GNOME comes with media-player controls in the notification panel, and improved search feature in the Files application. New GNOME will also let you easily upgrade to Fedora 25, by simply using its Software application. There's also improved font-rendering. Among other things Fedora 24 has an upgraded version of glibc, or GNU C Library, which comes with improved performance and bug fixes across the entire operating system. You can learn more about the features at TechRepublic..
I admit it's not fashionable, but I am a Fedora/CentOS/RH fanboy. Not only is Fedora offer the latest and greatest for the Desktop, but they offer enterprise level integrations and features that no other can match. FreeIPA anyone?!
does it still have systemd and gnome3? If so, don't want.
Grab a torrent now and help your peers!
I don't deny that some people give up because they are angry about X, Y, or Z. But I think, pure and simple, the reason Linux's desktop share is so low is that nearly every computer you buy comes with either Windows or Mac OS pre-installed, and people simply aren't going to change the operating system (and in most cases wouldn't quite know how to do that either).
They're actually referring to doing easy updates via a GUI since IIRC Fedora hasn't had a distro-upgrade gui. Thusly requiring the terminal for distro upgrades....which is easy enough.
In the terminal you use dnf system-upgrade though you can still use the old "fedup" command (which redirects to dnf system-upgrade)
Upgrading F23 to F24 in the terminal is as easy as:
[code]
sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=24
sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot[/code]
Of course, if one waits a couple of days the F23 version of gnome-software will be updated to support graphical distro update.
Make your mind up. Which is it?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Fedora has nothing to do with GNOME, systemd, or PulseAudio. Firstly, Fedora is developed by the Fedora Project. Secondly, GNOME is developed by the GNOME Foundation. Thirdly, systemd and PulseAudio are developed mostly by employees of Red Hat, but lots of others contribute to them, and they are distributed by freedesktop.org. You can say "oh well they're all funded by Red Hat so they're all really from the same source," but that's dubious logic. You could say the Linux kernel is Red Hat's project by the same logic.
If you hate GNOME Shell, use a different DE. I also hate it and I don't use it. If you hate PulseAudio, uninstall it and use something else to your like. If you don't like systemd, many distros still maintain SysVinit-core, or you could use Slackware or Devuan or Gentoo or CRUX because they don't ship systemd as the default init system.
Again and again you Anonymous Cowards proclaim a great upheaval over the above issues, but in real life, this doesn't seem to be the case; the user base, developer base, support base, and most clearly of all the *financials* of all the major Linux companies that ship distros with GNOME and PulseAudio and systemd (Canonical, SUSE, Red Hat, IBM, Oracle) are all doing just great.
Then there are all of the people who are angry but don't express it online. I bet a lot of them just say "fuck it" to Linux. They just use FreeBSD, or OS X, or even Windows without saying a thing. This is probably why Linux's share of the desktop market is at most 2%, and that's being generous.
The Linux desktop market share is higher than it was before systemd and GNOME 3 were widely adopted.
cut the bullshit.
Redhat sponsors Fedora.
Redhat pushes badly engineered garage like systemd and GNOME, including in Fedora.
Fedora is where RedHat tries its random brain farts out on the redhat guinea pigs, aka Fedora users.
Okay? And what's your point?
Somebody mod this guy up, he's right. Its the main reason why I switched away from the RH ecosystem. And before anybody tries to throw the "hipster" slur, I'm probably old enough to be your Dad. I've been at this for awhile, and there are good reasons to think the more traditional UNIX way was better.
That's great! If you're comfortable with the way you're accustomed to doing things, I have nothing against you. I'm just trying to figure out why so many people shit on the hard work done by FOSS developers, who spend time and money to give stuff to the world entirely for free (as in beer AND speech) and don't force you in any way to use it. I don't like GNOME Shell, but I don't anonymous shit-post every article about Linux. I just don't use it, and I don't suffer from apoplectic fits knowing that some peoples' opinions differ from mine.
Redhat is crapping in the open source pool, and the sewage has spread
How exactly does one infest a pool where anybody in the world is free to take the parts they want and leave the rest, like a bazaar? Again, if you don't like GNOME or systemd or Pulse Audio or Fedora, don't use them.
On the Gnome 3 front, I'll agree that it's probably easier to just go with MATE desktop if you miss Gnome 2 that much. I'm sympathetic, but the fork has been pretty viable, so it's not like there's no recourse.
Similarly for pulseaudio, by and large if it is not well liked, it may be ignored. Also as something relatively 'on the fringe', it's not something I feel like RedHat as an organization particularly cares about. Network Manager is another one in this way *mostly* (non-network manager ways of managing wifi have atrophied).
systemd is a different sort of thing in a couple of ways. One is that given it's role, it is not so simply swapped out at user will. It's one of those core components that is difficult to make selectable (like kernel and glibc). As such a user doesn't have as much individual ability to opt in/out, hence the advanced vitriol, as those who dislike it have relatively little recourse than to whine.
Also, to say that RHAT isn't effectively calling the shots over systemd is slily. Of course they are. It is, at it's core, a part of their strategy. It enables some capabilities they really want for their business in providing orchestration capabilities. The leadership of systemd is within redhat. the leadership of the kernel is outside (though RHAT makes a ton of contributions, they are not the leaders). The leadership role is not some arbitrary detail, it's pretty important, *particularly* in systemd that has such a strong vision of what it wants (contrast with an open source project like openstack that kind of meanders about all over the place).
systemd has caused some headaches and there's frustration because expressing those headaches is meat with mostly useless 'me toos' or dismissive 'you are just trolling'. Not a whole lot of 'well, let's see what we can do to address the specific concerns', but instead calling out such viewpoints as just flat out wrong.
Sure, a lot of it has devolved into inane troll copy/paste posts, but there are legitimate gripes and RedHat is in a key position as the pusher of the technology to be the target of frustration.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I don't deny that some people give up because they are angry about X, Y, or Z. But I think, pure and simple, the reason Linux's desktop share is so low is that nearly every computer you buy comes with either Windows or Mac OS pre-installed, and people simply aren't going to change the operating system (and in most cases wouldn't quite know how to do that either).
HP and Dell both offer no-OS options, HP offers preinstalled Ubuntu LTS on their machines, both options are at a discount to Windows installations. I haven't looked at other vendors lately.
Do me a favor. Go to Dell's and HP's websites and find me those laptops without Windows pre-installed within 2 minutes. No search engines allowed, you have to start at their home page and click to get there.
Unless you have their websites memorized, it'll probably take you a little longer than 2 minutes. Which goes to show that Linux desktops are really a "behind the counter" product of PC vendors, for the most part. They get no exposure because the vendors fear the wrath of Microsoft, despite being vastly better products.
"I would've been very, very happy if my Debian system had gotten to a login prompt, never mind a non-rescue shell, after a system update installed systemd! But it wouldn't even get that far."
Many distros (Fedora, Arch, Opensuse, Mageia etc.) switched to systemd and there were very few complaints. I upgraded distro releases that brought the switch to systemd on a number of systems without any issues.
All of the complaints about "upgrading to systemd broke my system" were "upgrading to Jessie broke my system".
So this experience of upgrading to systemd causing problems seems a bit specific to Debian. Maybe the Debian community should have spent less time arguing about systemd and more time testing upgrading to Jessie.
It's like the same 3 autistic dudes on slashdot, reddit, etc, railing against systemd 24/7. Christ, at least i've kissed a girl before.
I suspect that it's the same AC every single time because of the posting style (paragraph break every two sentences, constant use of the plural first-person nouns, the exact same arguments repeated over and over again), but I'm not 100% sure.
I'm very confused as to where you thought I was saying anything about 'going in guns blazing'. Also, Fedora didn't exist in the 90s.
I'm also unsure how you think every criticism constitutes dumping on systemd without 'proof'. A prominent example is the complaint that journald uses a binary format for logs. This is not some spurious claim without 'proof', it simply is the reality, but people disagree on the cost/benefit facet.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Somebody mod this guy up, he's right. Its the main reason why I switched away from the RH ecosystem. And before anybody tries to throw the "hipster" slur, I'm probably old enough to be your Dad. I've been at this for awhile, and there are good reasons to think the more traditional UNIX way was better.
That's great! If you're comfortable with the way you're accustomed to doing things, I have nothing against you. I'm just trying to figure out why so many people shit on the hard work done by FOSS developers, who spend time and money to give stuff to the world entirely for free (as in beer AND speech) and don't force you in any way to use it. I don't like GNOME Shell, but I don't anonymous shit-post every article about Linux. I just don't use it, and I don't suffer from apoplectic fits knowing that some peoples' opinions differ from mine.
What I'm trying to understand is the constant critique of others when you are free to do your own thing. Linus started developing the kernel all by himself and now there's hundreds (thousands?) of folks helping him out. Each of the distros started as an idea by a few people, then grew as more people liked what the first few were doing.
I for one don't care that my laptop uses PulseAudio, SystemD, NetworkManager, or Gnome Shell. As long as they work for what I want to do, why should I care? Sure, there are a handful of times Gnome has crashed, but it's still far fewer times than Windows XP or 7 has crashed for me.
If you don't like the way something is being done, use something that you do like. If you know enough about the internals to bitch and moan about the intricacies of SystemD vs SysVInit, you know enough to piece together something you do like. Stop bitching about RedHat and make your own.