Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fedora 29 Released (techrepublic.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the new-and-improved dept.

ekimd writes: Fedora 29 is released today. Among the new features are the ability to allow parallel installation of packages such as Node.js. Fedora 29 also supports ZRAM (formerly called compcache) for ARMv7 and v8. In addition to the more efficient use of RAM, it also increases the lifespan of microSD cards on the Raspberry Pi as well as other SBCs.

"Additionally, UEFI for ARMv7 is now supported in Fedora 29, which also benefits Raspberry Pi users," reports TechRepublic. "Fedora already supported UEFI on 64-bit ARM devices."

31 comments

  1. Re: Huh? by NovenTheHero · · Score: 1

    Then don't post. To those that do caro, this is interesting news.

  2. NP-complete problem by davecb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Containers are a good mitigation, but see https://research.swtch.com/ver... from Russ Cox for an overview of the underlying (really evil!) problem. My own views? https://leaflessca.wordpress.c... (and others)

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
    1. Re:NP-complete problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a simple polynomial solution to this problem, and it doesn't involve solving a SAT problem.

      (Hint: Find an offending library in linear time, and then either (a) factor out the parts everyone seems to want, or (b) tell one of the packages they can't use it if they want to be in the official distro.)

    2. Re:NP-complete problem by davecb · · Score: 1

      I agree, but I suspect the various library authors won't (;-))

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    3. Re:NP-complete problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool story on the RHS of the blog about Text Widgets and html.
      https://leaflessca.wordpress.c...

  3. raspberry pi, really? by Espectr0 · · Score: 2

    who would use a kitchen sink distro on the raspberry pi?

    --
    Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
    1. Re:raspberry pi, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I use Fedora 28 on a raspberry pi for a local DNS. I want something that just runs without user intervention for months. I tried raspbian and raspBSD but neither of them seem to be ready for primetime. There was always some issue popping up whether it be updates not working automatically, or the network disconnecting for no known reason. Fedora just flawlessly does its thing in the background.

    2. Re:raspberry pi, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DietPi. Seriously.

    3. Re:raspberry pi, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ditto, I use Fedora 28 on a RPi3 Model B for monitoring my solar array. No problems, minimal IO, minimal idle usage.

      I have however, given up on using microsd cards. Even with the official power supply and raspibian the RPi would usually corrupt the ext4 filesystem every three weeks or so.

      No problems since switching to a USB drive. That was a general common problem I didn't find while researching.

    4. Re:raspberry pi, really? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Try Slackware ARM.

      I can usually ignore it for most of a year; until some remote security vuln in bind or something pops up.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:raspberry pi, really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MicroSD cards are not designed for lots of writes. There are ones made for security systems IoT devices that are designed for lots of writes.

  4. Beware if you have a Lenovo laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have a recent model Lenovo laptop, there is a chance that the kernel included in Fedora 29 will not recognize your touchpad or trackpoint. You could run into the same problem with an updated Fedora 28. Oddly enough, older kernels work just fine with it.

    1. Re: Beware if you have a Lenovo laptop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the warning. I have Fedora on a Lenovo laptop. Guess ill wait a couple weeks to upgrade.

  5. Great Move before IBM messes things up by aod7br7932 · · Score: 1

    Great Move before IBM messes things up. Can RHEL be forked?

    1. Re: Great Move before IBM messes things up by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Considering that IBM puts the E in Enterprise I doubt that they will

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    2. Re:Great Move before IBM messes things up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can RHEL be forked?

      Scientific Linux

    3. Re:Great Move before IBM messes things up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but unless a beta hits very very soon, RHEL8 is likely going to happen under IBM's watch, you may want to consider forking Fedora instead of RHEL.

    4. Re:Great Move before IBM messes things up by renegadesx · · Score: 1

      Scientific Linux isnt a fork, the code is still the same and designed to be binary compatible, it's like CentOS.
      Software isn't really a forked until it starts going in it's own direction like how LibreOffice is a fork of OpenOffice, MariaDB is a fork of mysql and OpenIndiana is fork of OpenSolaris

      --
      Make SELinux enforcing again!
  6. member when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    member when systemd seemed like a good idea?

    Thanks fedora.

    1. Re:member when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is getting pretty boring, systemd is infinitely better than sysv init and everyone with a brain agrees.

    2. Re:member when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      since one cannot agree or disagree without a brain, those who do disagree do have brains. Therefore not everyone with a brain agrees.

    3. Re:member when? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh...

      We used to use complicated shell scripts in raw text to boot our systems...

      Now we use standard C libraries for common things and any language you want to define custom actions.

      It is a huge improvement, not least because the bits you'll mess up are smaller and the rest is far more widely peer-reviewed.

      Anything that takes away redundancy is always good.

    4. Re:member when? by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

      You are completely fucking wrong. It uses unit files to define boot behavior, not "C libraries". Unit files can callout to scripts, but have very little logic embedded in them. The whole idea is that if they take some of your toys away (init + shell scripts) you'll be less likely to screw things up. Unit files are pretty much identical to Windows .ini files. They use a section header, followed by key value pairs. This is much less flexible and functional versus using shell scripts (which could already call "common things and any language", in fact that's basically the whole point of shell script, you fucking dumbass coward). In systemd if you need some kind of logic, you are faced with trying to define the condition in a unit file that has no Turing-style logic, or bake in yet-another-step-to-follow as it calls out some random script in some random language (often some shitty back-trace generating Python crap). You might want to actually learn about systemd before you go sucking it's dick.

    5. Re:member when? by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

      Is that why you posted as a Coward? Because "everyone agrees". Most clueful Linux users bailed to BSD or Devuan post-Systemd. So maybe... but I seriously fucking doubt it.

    6. Re:member when? by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

      I can't remember, no. Probably because Fedora already sucked ass before systemd. They've been a kitchen-sink GNOME / Let's-turn-Linux-Into-WinNT distro choice of assholes way before systemd came along to poison the rest of the Linux environment. However, they did cheerlead it more than anyone else, for which I'll never forgive them. However, it doesn't matter much since, as I mentioned we already hated each other well before they hopped on Pottering's dick.

  7. Discarding python 2 by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

    Fedora 29 is, effectively, discarding Python 2 in favor of Python 3. This means that the leading edge packages from Fedora will no longer include options to compile for the older, standard Python 2 built into every RHEL or CentOS release without extensive manual revision.

    1. Re:Discarding python 2 by Chrisq · · Score: 2

      Fedora 29 is, effectively, discarding Python 2 in favor of Python 3. This means that the leading edge packages from Fedora will no longer include options to compile for the older, standard Python 2 built into every RHEL or CentOS release without extensive manual revision.

      Someone has to do it and a decade after release it's about time. This will trickle back to Centos/RHEL eventually but until then the easy thing is if you want to run on Centos/RHEL then build on Centos/RHEL

    2. Re:Discarding python 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Python2 is been dragged along years too long anyway. someone has to make the break first.

    3. Re:Discarding python 2 by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid that this is not something that can "trickle back". It requires complete migration of critical system components like RPM, which I'd not expect to see done with Python 3 before RHEL 8. It also requires complex revision of the source packages from Fedora 29 or later. Those packages had tools to compile with and deploy for Python 2, and those hooks have been deliberately excluded.

      I'm sad to say that I've not seen any hint of a beta or tentative release date for RHEL 8. There have now been _10_ Fedora releases since the Fedora 19 on which RHEL 7 was based. I'm concerned that RHEL 8 will be either completely obsolete when published, or so divergent from RHEL 7 that there will be no effective upgrade, RHEL and CentOS users may as well consider a switch to other Linux or UNIX systems. RHEL 7 came close to suffering this problem with the switch to systemd,

  8. You need a bleeding-edge VirtualBox build by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even the 6.0 Beta1 is not recent enough for Fedora 29.