Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fedora 10 Released

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the looks-all-around-nice dept.

Red Hat Software 211

ekimd writes "Fedora 10, aka 'Cambridge,' was released today. Some of the major features include: 'wireless connection sharing enables ad hoc network sharing, better setup and use of printers through improved management tools, virtualization storage provisioning for local and remote connections now simplified, SecTool is a new security audit and intrusion detection system.' Versions of major software include: Gnome 2.24, Eclipse 3.4 and RPM 4.6. A features list can be found here." Reader Nate2 suggests LinuxFormat's detailed look at the new release, and adds a few more details about the software it contains: the release includes "a new graphical boot-up sequence, OpenOffice.org 3, many improvements to sound support via PulseAudio and other updates."

cancel ×

211 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

But does it run on .... shit that does not work... (4, Interesting)

ACK!! (10229) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886527)

The improved sound support is welcome. I just feel that my previous experience with yum was that it was clunky on older hardware and a bit slow next to Synaptic and apt-get on the same machine. Slicking up the interfaces is nice and the inclusion of OpenOffice 3 is very cool though. Good luck Fedora maybe I will try them out instead of Ubuntu next time I decide to upgrade my OS.

Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (-1, Troll)

The_Abortionist (930834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886941)

There is been a bug in the Linux kernel that makes computers reboot every 47.9 days. This bug has been around for nearly 15 years!

I don't think that Linux can claim to be ready for the desktop (nor the server for that matter) until its development process is streamlined. As it is, the development priorities are set at the whims of one person.

Huh? (1)

maz2331 (1104901) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887889)

My Linux boxes tend to have an uptime of over 90 days or more, depending on whether or not power is stable.

Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (4, Informative)

BoxRec (532280) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888131)

Your confused, there is no such bug in Linux and hasn't ever been (or at least since 1997 when I first used it). There is/was a Windows bug/feature in which uptime is stored as a DWORD so the maximum value can only be 4294967295 or 47.9 days. Maybe this causes some Windows applications to bring down the whole system ?

Re:Will it fix the most notorious Linux bug?? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888347)

There is been a bug in the Linux kernel that makes computers reboot every 47.9 days. This bug has been around for nearly 15 years!

I think you've misspelled "Windows NT" as "Linux".

I don't think that Linux can claim to be ready for the desktop (nor the server for that matter) until its development process is streamlined. As it is, the development priorities are set at the whims of one person.

I think you've misspelled "Windows" as "Linux".

--
Linux violates 235 Microsoft patents.

I think you've misspelled "inspires" as "violates".

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (1)

msuarezalvarez (667058) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887293)

There is very, very little that can change the behavior of yum on older hardware. Since it uses quite a bit of memory, your problems with that may be due to broken memory. Run memtest for a while.

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (2, Insightful)

chammy (1096007) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887807)

I've always found yum to use a ridiculous amount of resources on my setups. Whenever I install something on my tiny P4 server it will drain so much memory that the computer can't do anything else at the same time. I had a copy of debian on it in the past and I could run apt upgrades and still work in another terminal just fine. Yum does have some pros over apt but they sure aren't speed and efficiency.

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (1, Troll)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888459)

Yum does have some pros over apt but they sure aren't speed and efficiency.

Good god, like what? I haven't found *anything* yum does better than apt.

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (1)

chammy (1096007) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888623)

Plugins, namely. One of the coolest ones is Presto [fedoraproject.org] . But like I said, what use is it if I can't even run it on my server without adding more ram?

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (2, Interesting)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888581)

I just don't get this level of hate against yum. It's approaching ridiculous levels now.

Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work (5, Informative)

Pros_n_Cons (535669) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888715)

How long ago was this "previous yum experience" the last several years have seen vast improvements in yum.

Problem is when Fedora first jumped off everyone tried it then formed an opinion based on 5 years ago. Most of these opinions spider across slashdot by people who haven't installed fedora since F2. When i was running Fedora a simple yum update command would finish in about 3-5 seconds. I'm also using a p4/2gb.

From the yum FAQ:
How is the speed of yum compared to APT-RPM?

yum automatically checks the repository every time you perform a command, except when run in shell mode, while APT only checks it when you run 'apt-get update' manually. This causes it to appear slower than it is. If you want yum to run from cache instead of checking the repositories, run 'yum -C '. See the man page for details.

yum now uses sqlite for its back-end database by default. This results in an edge in speed over older versions of yum. Beginning with Fedora Core 4, yum contains significant improvements that make it faster and more capable than older versions.

In general to posters. If you haven't installed an OS in 5 years would you mind not commenting on it unless you state when you used it. People out there get the impression nobody fixed yum when it was fixed 7-8 versions ago.

anonymous says... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886547)

"I don't care." - anonymous

The big question is. (4, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886579)

Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?
That is the thing that makes Ubuntu so easy. You just take a check mark off the evil restricted repositories and you can download all those evil codecs that let you play video on your Linux box.
Oh and those evil closed source video drivers as well.

Re:The big question is. (5, Informative)

guardia (579095) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886663)

RPM Fusion is getting pretty darn good http://rpmfusion.org/ [rpmfusion.org] Just one RPM to install manually, and you can get all the "evil" stuff very easily... plus, haven't tested it yet, but the new hooks in Totem should make the process pretty much automatic.

Re:The big question is. (1)

bob.appleyard (1030756) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887801)

A load of rpmfusion repos just showed up in my repolist today.

Re:The big question is. (4, Informative)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886671)

You can install the rpmfusion-nonfree repo's signing keys and update the binary blobs via yum. However RPMfusion is not included in the release by default and you'll have to do this by yourself.

AFAIK distributing "evil" codecs are against Fedora's policy so they don't do that. But that doesn't prevent anyone else from doing it.

Re:The big question is. (5, Informative)

mowall (865642) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886673)

Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?

Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion [rpmfusion.org] . So you just install the rpmfusion rpm and then you get access to all the goodies. Not too sure how this is presented GUI-wise though.

Re:The big question is. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887033)

Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion [rpmfusion.org] .

Except for the package libdvdcss, which could not be included into RPM Fusion and is still sitting in Livna.

Re:The big question is. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887775)

Except for the package libdvdcss, which could not be included into RPM Fusion and is still sitting in Livna.

Extremely lame. I don't have this damnable bother with Ubuntu.

Different Audience (3, Insightful)

maz2331 (1104901) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887857)

Fedora and Ubuntu are aimed at different audiences and/or "market" segments. Ubuntu is a great "just works" distro, whereas Fedora is much nicer for tweakers.

Both have little things the other lacks, or work slightly differently in some ways.

I say use the one you prefer.

Re:Different Audience (0, Troll)

mR.bRiGhTsId3 (1196765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888033)

A distro for tweakers that ships Gnome by default? Gasp!

Re:Different Audience (2, Informative)

mowall (865642) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888551)

A distro for tweakers that ships Gnome by default? Gasp!

There's a KDE spin too and has been for the last two releases at least. Just take your pick.

Re:Different Audience (1)

mR.bRiGhTsId3 (1196765) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888739)

I couldn't resist. However, I seem to remember the article claiming there were difficulties with the KDE spin because the KDE release cycle is so far askew from the fedora one.

Re:The big question is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25889081)

Why is that marked "informative"? libdvdcss is in not in the official Ubuntu repositories either.

Re:The big question is. (1)

Alioth (221270) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887249)

I think it's pretty easy, last time I did it was with Livna - click on the RPM on their website and install it (using the GUI, naturally), then the new packages can easily be found in the Add/Remove software GUI along with all the usual Fedora stuff. Piece of cake.

Re:The big question is. (2, Informative)

mowall (865642) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888509)

Seems you can enable rpm-fusion during the installation so you're up and running straight away. Very nice. This blog post [blogspot.com] provides useful details.

RPM Fusion (3, Insightful)

ink (4325) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886691)

It's never been difficult to add Dag and Livna, but it's now even easier: http://rpmfusion.org/ [rpmfusion.org] I really liked the polish of Fedora 9, it was a huge step up from 8. Hopefully Fedora 10 continues in that direction.

Re:RPM Fusion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887019)

I was running F8 for a while on my laptop. I liked it, but one thing that bugged me was the occasional time-lag between Dag, Livna (which are great) and the core repositories. Especially with kernel updates, I would have to wait a few days to update, or else things would break.

At one point, I stupidly ran an update right before heading out to a meeting. I rebooted, and no wireless (I was using madwifi from livna, I think). oops. It was my own foolishness I guess, but still...

I can't say I've ever noticed any problems like that from the ubuntu restricted repos, which seem to be kept much more in-sync.

Re:RPM Fusion (1)

ink (4325) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887045)

Unless you're running rawhide, this is almost never an issue anymore.

Breaking the law is always easy (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886771)

The fun thing about using Ubuntu is that Canonical does not have any concerns about the laws of the United States of America. Red Hat does, because unlike Canonical, Red Hat is an American corporation. Red Hat cannot ship any software that could violate patent or copyright law, and many of the codecs in the non-free repositories do violate those laws. If you do not like the consequences of those laws, then:
  1. Let your congressman know that, unless he at least attempts to undo those laws, you will stop voting for him.
  2. Join the campaign to repeal those laws
  3. Use free codecs and demand that people send you media that is free-libre

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (1)

ohxten (1248800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887227)

Let your congressman know that, unless he at least attempts to undo those laws, you will stop voting for him.

Am I wrong, or is the reason that they cannot ship certain software products because the EULA specifically states that you cannot redistribute without permission? If this is the case, then telling your congressman would be worthless, wouldn't it?

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (4, Informative)

Amazing Quantum Man (458715) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887645)

I believe GP was referring to the fact that in the US, DVD playback software can't be shipped on a box without a license from the DVDCCA. Thank you so much for the DMCA, Congress.

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887271)

The same goes for openSUSE. However there you can just add the Packman repositories that will install MPlayer. Also you can add the ATI or NVidia repositoeries and install those drivers.

The latter one are at the respective companies themselves.

They are just not enabled by default.

Then there is the one-click-install where you can just click on a link and that will do the rest for you (after entering the root password and click on OK once or twice)

Yes, it is a work around.

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887285)

Violating patents you know about is one thing. But it is probably a safe bet they violate patents they don't know about, and for Red Hat, the risk doing so is actually pretty minimal. First, the potential award from such a suit probably would not justify the cost. Second, many companies would think twice before suing an open source developer, just to avoid negative PR.

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (1)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887451)

Yeah, but Fedora is not Red Hat.

Re:Breaking the law is always easy (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888169)

Canonical almost certainly has support agreements in the US, and they got assets there (the OEM team is located there). Sounds to me they'd have a little problem escaping US jurisdiction if someone was to take a shot at them. Hopefully what they're doing is distancing themselves enough to stay out of trouble.

Fedora 10 AKA Garbage (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886837)

Linux is a stinking turd...

Re:The big question is. (2, Funny)

BigGerman (541312) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887063)

did not you read the FA? This ease-of-use-thing must be one of those terrible controversies every Ubuntu release is allegedly suffering from.

Re:The big question is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888971)

I hate distros that have "restricted" repos, thats one of things I like about arch is that everything is enabled by default and you don't have to add 50 repos to install vlc or mplayer

Warning: I is a n00b (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886585)

I remember having fun installing Fedora 9 on my PS3. I'd never used linux before (I know, I know, I'll hand in my geek card at the next meeting...) and I figured it'd be more interesting to get a distro NOT designed for the PS3 to run properly than one that was (Such as YDL).

But for those "in the know", would this distro feature any changes/improvements with regards to the PS3? Or is it still "unofficially" supported and thus will be about the same?

Re:Warning: I is a n00b (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886779)

you're stupid, go kill yourself

Re:Warning: I is a n00b (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886901)

I would, but your mum would follow shortly after.

Re:Warning: I is a n00b (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887813)

Newer packages, so yes.

Re:Warning: I is a n00b (1)

nukem996 (624036) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888621)

While Fedora 9 isn't an official PS3 distro it is one of the official Cell distro's. While I don't know of anything right now that has been updated for Cell I'm sure it has a newer kernel which has bug fixes and newer things for Cell. You can read more about Cell here http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/power/cell/index.html?S_TACT=105AGX16&S_CMP=LP [ibm.com]

They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (2, Interesting)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886593)

RPM 4.6 is an RC, not a stable release. I have to say it's a somewhat bold move. RPM is the heart of the distro. It is even more important than the kernel.

As a Fedora supporter I for one welcome the move.

Now cue the RPM haters.

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (1)

homey of my owney (975234) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886787)

Can't be any worse the the NetworkManager implementation or having seLinux on by default.

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (1)

DiegoBravo (324012) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888051)

Does somebody (beyond government bureaucrats) really uses seLinux on??? Does somebody understand the enhanced permissions??? Does somebody needs those fine-grained object access controls???

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (4, Insightful)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886935)

I think you hit it right on the head. Fedora can do this, because that's what it's for. It avoids getting trapped behind painful changes because of worries that it'll cause short term pain.

Fedora should be all about long term gain, and if RPM 4.6 is a little bit experimental, great. Let's get the bugs out in the open and sort it out.

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887241)

Fedora (and the old free (non-enterprise) Redhat) were always about the bleeding edge. You get the newest stuff that they can cram in, and bugs aren't that uncommon.

RedHat Enterprise uses much older, much more tested code. They use Fedora for their testbed, use them to push wider adoption and testing of software that they want to put into their flagship product.

It's not a bad deal, but people who put the "newest" redhat stuff on their servers make my skin crawl. It's not really for that.

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887395)

I love RPM and YUM. I love Red Hat because they contribute code and solutions back into the community. I fear if everybody jumps into the ubuntu camp (a company that honestly takes far more then it gives) while neglecting Red Hat a company that gives far more then it takes, long term Linux will suffer. Also while some small startups may use ubuntu, other small startups also use RHEL and/or CentOS and most middle and large companies use RHEL, so I think if you want to get a job working with Linux it makes sense to spend sometime with Fedora. Just my thoughts. Also in my thought bag is that many of you /.ers are posers who like the idea of Linux but even while trashing Windows, blog from your XP and Vista machines.

Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate (2, Informative)

jackspenn (682188) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887619)

The cool thing about Fedora is that it is cutting edge innovative stuff. I use RHEL or CENTOS on servers, but on my Thinkpad, which isn't even my primary laptop, I just love tossing on each Fedora release as soon as it comes out and tweaking it until the next version comes out. It is a fun way to geek out and learn. If there are bugs or glitches, it is often challenging and fun to workout and troubleshoot. The cool part is that much of Fedora leads into RHEL releases so as a Linux consultant I not only can have hands on knowledge of parts that are later put in RHEL, but I sometimes have knowledge about why something wasn't included. I love Red Hat and I love bleeding edge so I love Fedora. If you are about cutting edge software, if you are about being part of a distribution that gives back to the community as a whole, if you want to learn a distribution that could help get you a job, if you are about user based support, tips and documentation, Fedora is for you. If you are all about what the current fad is, maybe not so much, although it has a huge following.

Enjoy the porn (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886619)

http://mrfriendly.freehostia.com/

Re:Enjoy the porn (5, Funny)

Random BedHead Ed (602081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886925)

I was hoping that by "porn" the AC parent meant "screenshots of the new OS." But that's not what AC meant: AC meant "porn." Whoever modded this NSFW link +1 Informative should never get mod points again.

Mirrors are still unavailable (3, Informative)

Deputy Doodah (745441) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886623)

Not (really) released just yet; none of the mirrors are working.
10:40 am Eastern

Re:Mirrors are still unavailable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886689)

mirrors.kernel.org is working right now, since that's where my download is coming from.

Re:Mirrors are still unavailable (1)

mowall (865642) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886693)

The torrent is working fine for me, albeit a little slow.

Re:Mirrors are still unavailable (1)

Deputy Doodah (745441) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886713)

Yay!
Found a working mirror!
10:50 am.

Re:Mirrors are still unavailable (2, Informative)

Chang (2714) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886741)

Portland State seems to be working. I'm just about done downloading a minimal set of packages.

Re:Mirrors are still unavailable (1)

lowen (10529) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886817)

10:54

Getting from some I2 mirrors (we're on I2 here). Mirrors should open up soon enough.

been using since beta (1)

Sadsfae (242195) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886715)

on my dell mini 9, boots much faster than f9

I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (1, Redundant)

hey (83763) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886773)

I expect this one will be better still.
(No I don't work for Red Hat.)

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887015)

From my other post down below:

Just a little pet peeve, but it's just F10, not FC10. ie, Fedora 10, not Fedora Core 10. The "Core" was dropped quite a while ago.

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (2, Interesting)

Random BedHead Ed (602081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887229)

I expect this one will be better still. (No I don't work for Red Hat.)

As a Fedora user perhaps you (and your many cohorts in the community who are reading this) can offer some input.

I used to use Red Hat and Fedora in olden times. I got to know them really well (I'm even an RHCE). But when FC2 came out it really bothered me. While FC1 was basically an evolution of Red Hat 9, FC2 was way too experimental to be an everyday business or personal OS, and it revealed what Red Hat was going to do with its free OS: turn me into a guniea pig. It was the first Fedora to sport the 2.6 kernel, which was pretty neat, but I found it to be unstable. The next couple releases did nothing to restore my confidence, and I've been a very happy Kubuntu user ever since.

Until now. Kubuntu has always been a slightly shoddy implementation of KDE, but the KDE 4.1 that comes with Intrepid Ibex (Kubuntu 8.10) is really getting on my nerves. It's sluggish - the Desktop takes about a minute to load, even when I turn off X.org's composite effects. And it feels incomplete. Even though I've switched to double-click in KDE, the file selection windows (like the one in which I select an image for my Desktop wallpaper) interpret single-clicks as full selections and promptly close the windows, so I can't preview my wallpaper selection in the right pane. When I installed Gnome, KDE started loading the Gnome network management utility to manage my wireless connection, even though KDE's is also open in the panel right next to it. so I've been using Gnome for the last few days.

I absolutely love KDE 4.1's desktop, panel and other Plasma elements, but I can't stand the experience overall, and while I'm open to the idea that it could be due to issues with KDE 4.1 rather than Kubuntu ... well, when I saw this announcement for Fedora 10 it got me thinking. So how about it? Am I being unfair and blaming KDE 4.1 issues on my distro? Do any KDE users recommend this distro for KDE over others? Has Fedora improved as much as I've heard it has? Has anyone used both Kubuntu and Fedora/KDE, and thus be able to provide a comparison? Because I'm in a serious distro switchin' mood.

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (2, Insightful)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887951)

Try upgrading to the latest 9.04 alpha if you're not using it on a critical box. KDE4.1 has been much improved (might even be 4.2... dunno), but there are still lots of random broken packages and such.

That said, KDE4.1 is definitely the issue with Kubuntu. It's still not mature, though it is "stable".

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887955)

It's been my experience that Fedora really started getting good around Fedora 6, and the improvements have appeared to only continue from there.

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (1)

marsu_k (701360) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888277)

If you want (in my opinion), the best, certainly one of the most configurable, KDE 4.x experience out there, try KDEmod [kdemod.ath.cx] . Currently it's at version 4.1.3, and includes some backports from the 4.2 branch as well (finally, panel auto-hiding for example). Even better, it runs on a very flexible and fast distribution [archlinux.org] , that's either i686 or x86-64 optimized, has a really fast package manager, uses precompiled packages by default but makes compiling packages with custom options very trivial and is as light (or heavy) as you want it to be. Granted, it doesn't offer as much hand holding for newcomers as Ubuntu or Fedora, but the community documentation is generally very good. Check out the wiki - if the installation instructions don't seem too intimidating I suggest you give it a go. Once you have a base Arch system up and running, installing KDEmod very easy.

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888559)

The best thing to do would be to download the KDE Live image http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-kde and try it for yourself. Live images are awesome because there is no commitment, if you don't like it, just don't boot from it anymore. Running from CD can be slow, but if you make it a Live USB it'll be fast and you can retain changes between boots.

Re:I always look forward to new Fedora Core's (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887867)

It hasn't been called Fedora Core for quite a while. It's just Fedora now.

I would really like to give it a try... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886791)

...but unfortunately I'm still compiling the latest Gentoo!

Re:I would really like to give it a try... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25889125)

...since May

Xen slowly being discarded ? (1)

MarkKnopfler (472229) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886843)

This dom0 [fedoraproject.org] was rather important for me. I am still running FC8 for that reason. I guess xen virtualization is slowly disappearing. Kvm I presume will be the way to go eventually...

Re:Xen slowly being discarded ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887093)

Xen is going to die among the Free Software community. VirtualBox for testing and playing around with OSes are good enough. Server side kvm will be the best option soon.

Re:Xen slowly being discarded ? (3, Informative)

jsolan (1014825) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888395)

Xen virtualization is still strong, fedora just isn't porting the kernel patches upstream anymore. I believe Novell has a 2.6.27 kernel with xen patches. I would think it to be possible to pull down the kernel source from Fedora, build the config, then pull in suse kernel source, run make oldconfig, and compile your own kernel for fedora using the suse sources. I've never tried it and fully understand that this is an unacceptable option for most fedora users.

I've been following the fedora-xen mailing list and they would still like to put xen back in, but not until it's in the upstream kernel. As stated at the F9 release, they feel it is counterproductive to maintain 2 different kernels, which I can't disagree with them on. The latest news I heard is that they were hoping the 3.4 release of xen to have pv_ops dom0 in the kernel. Wether or not that it's Linus' kernel, they haven't really stated. If fedora is waiting for pv_ops dom0 to make it into Linus' kernel, then I would have to agree that xen will slowly dissapear and KVM will be the way to go. I see that as an uphill battle for the xen team since kvm is already in the kernel.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Virtualization [fedoraproject.org] for more information on f10 virtualization.

Re:Xen slowly being discarded ? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888675)

Xen as a dom0 is in fact losing favor in the Red Hat world. There are technologies being developed that will allow a KVM host to run Xen guests. It's called "xenner" http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/ and is coming along nicely, but not super stable yet.

Virtualization is important to Red Hat, and given how much of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 was focused around virtualization, there is little doubt that existing deployments on Xen won't have a migration path to what RHEL 6 offers. Red Hat hedged their bets by using lib-virt as the api for everything, so that they could change the underlying virt technology without breaking software.

Distro comparison? (3, Interesting)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886889)

Is there a web site that compares distros? I look at the release list for FC10 and I don't see much compared to how Ubuntu is, but there is a lot of techy stuff under the hood also on that list that causes me to wonder what is good "inside" of Ubuntu, versus FC10.

Re:Distro comparison? (1)

guardia (579095) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886947)

It's brown :)

Re:Distro comparison? (5, Informative)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | more than 5 years ago | (#25886973)

Just a little pet peeve, but it's just F10, not FC10. ie, Fedora 10, not Fedora Core 10. The "Core" was dropped quite a while ago.

Re:Distro comparison? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888205)

true, but they still use fc as the prefix for the rpms,

Re:Distro comparison? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888329)

Just a little pet peeve, but it's just F10, not FC10. ie, Fedora 10, not Fedora Core 10. The "Core" was dropped quite a while ago.

Why are all the packages named fc10 then ??

Re:Distro comparison? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888855)

Minor technical problem. In rpm versions, .fc8 is newer than .f10. So for the rpm tags we re-defined "c" from "Core" to "collection", as in this package is part of the Fedora collection 8.

Re:Distro comparison? (1)

partenon (749418) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887117)

You can compare the softwares (and versions) distributed by each one on http://distrowatch.com/ [distrowatch.com]

Or, download the Live CD for both of them and try out :-)

Tip: if you don't want to burn a CD just to test a distro, you can write the Live CD images to a USB stick. Just look at the livecd-iso-to-disk script in Fedora's ISO.

Re:Distro comparison? (1)

yourexhalekiss (833943) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887485)

Distrowatch?

I'm not touching it for a few months. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25886949)

When I did an upgrade install from F8 to F9 last year, it trashed many things, most importantly, the software updater. The upgrade install wanted to use that new one (I can't remember but it was a 0.x release) and the updates wouldn't work. I couldn't get YUM working again. I ended up reformatting and installing F8 clean. But wait! There's more. After waiting a few months, I did the upgrade install again from f8 to f9. It worked fine. After installing from DVD, I did the update, and everything worked. I wonder if the packages that were updated after install fixed a few things since my first attempt.

Anyway, I'll wait for the experts have a crack at it and post the fixes on fedora forums before I even attempt it.

P.S. I tried moving to Ubuntu, but I didn' like it. I like fedora - I used to be a Slackware guy too.

It took until 11/08 to get better printer support? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25887523)

better setup and use of printers through improved management tools

Cutting edge, baby! (Why are standard components taking this long to get written?)

Fast boot (3, Informative)

dfdashh (1060546) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887549)

The dev team did away with rhgb (replaced by plymouth [youtube.com] ) and used readahead to achieve faster (30 seconds was the target) boot times (details here [fedoraproject.org] ). Plymouth relies on kernel modesetting support to get its graphical goodness, which unfortunately is only supported well on ATI chips.

RHEL6 (1)

MagPulse (316) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887685)

Any word on whether Red Hat Enterprise 6 will be based on this release or Fedora 9?

Re:RHEL6 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888125)

According to Red Hat's presentation at SC08 last week, Enterprise 6 will be base on Fedora 11.

Re:RHEL6 (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888647)

According to Red Hat's presentation at SC08 last week, Enterprise 6 will be base on Fedora 11.

2010 then? Late 2009 would be pushing it a bit.

Re:RHEL6 (0, Flamebait)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888547)

Any word on whether Red Hat Enterprise 6 will be based on this release or Fedora 9?

Crickets ...

I'm getting the impression it will more likely be f10 or possibly even f11 (or ... aaargh). RHEL 6 is taking FOREVER to get moving. I bet it has something to do with readiness of the Fedora code base to be beat into shape for for prime time being somewhere between "poor" and "damn poor" for the string of Fedoras from 4 through 9.

[Dons flame resistant apparel]

Re:RHEL6 (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888683)

... by MagPulse (316)

64210 doesn't seem like a very low user number at all any more :-o

Competitive Advantage? (2, Interesting)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887691)

Why should I use this new Fedora instead of Ubuntu or OS X or FreeBSD, etc.?

What a shitty summary (par for the course, I know, I know).

Re:Competitive Advantage? (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887841)

Because blue is a nicer colour than brown, translucent grey-white, or blood-stain red.

Re:Competitive Advantage? (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888611)

Use Fedora if you're big on cutting edge, and FOSS.
Use Ubuntu if you're hoping for things to just work.
I'm not sure abotu FreeBSD. And really, on Ubuntu, I'm just passing what I've heard as the only time I tried it it failed me terribly.

Name (1)

kylant (527449) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887713)

I object to naming the release "Cambridge". It is difficult enough as it is to explain to Americans that there is not only Cambridge, Massachusetts but also a Cambridge, England (with an 800-year old university) in honour of which Cambridge, Massachusetts was given its name. Now you also have to explain that you are not talking about a linux distribution...

2+GB rpm's? (1)

mu51c10rd (187182) | more than 5 years ago | (#25887947)

The new version of rpm (4.6) shipped with Fedora 10 claims that it can handle packages over 2GB now. Does anyone have packages that big?

Re:2+GB rpm's? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888095)

dunno, but it's gonna happen sooner or later, might as well build the support in now.

Re:2+GB rpm's? (5, Funny)

bubkus_jones (561139) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888157)

My package is at least that big.

Oh come on, someone had to say it.

Re:2+GB rpm's? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25888629)

I was going to mod this but I couldn't decide between funny or overrated.

Happy anniversary Fedora !! (3, Interesting)

messner_007 (1042060) | more than 5 years ago | (#25888013)

I am using Fedora from the first version on ...

I have a server, that still runs Fedora core 1:

[messner@Server messner]$ cat /etc/*-release
Fedora Core release 1 (Yarrow)
Fedora Core release 1 (Yarrow)
[messner@Server messner]$ date
Tue Nov 25 18:16:34 CET 2008

I will shut it down this month .... now it can go to rest ....

Sometimes Fedora wasn't so polished as it should be, the first versions were very problematic, documentation and community were scarce ... sometimes it was hardly usable for me, because I am not an expert.

But it got better and better with each release. Number 9 was excellent, first class ... I think number 7 was the first one, that really rocked, but No. 9 rocks ...

I am downloading number 10 now. I know it will be good. It is getting better and better with each release.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>