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 12 Beta Released

timothy posted about 5 years ago | from the crimson-chapeau dept.

Red Hat Software 236

AdamWill writes "The Fedora project has announced the release of Fedora 12 Beta, which is available here. This will be the final pre-release before the final release in November. New features of Fedora 12 highlighted in the announcement include substantial improvements and fixes to the major graphics drivers, including experimental 3D acceleration support for AMD Radeon r600+-based adapters; improved mobile broadband support and new Bluetooth PAN tethering support in NetworkManager; improved performance in the 32-bit releases; significant fixes and improvements to audio support, including easy Bluetooth audio support; initial implementation of completely open source Broadcom wireless networking via the openfwwf project; significant improvements to the Fedora virtualization stack; and easy access to the Moblin desktop environment and a preview of the new GNOME Shell interface for GNOME. Further details on the major new features of Fedora 12 can be found in the release announcement and feature list. Known issues are documented in the common bugs page."

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

first (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29826911)

POST!

Great! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29826995)

Another piece of crap from Fedora.

Congratulation! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827031)

You are an asshole!

Re:Congratulation! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827111)

So are the peeps at Dead Rat.. Drepper and Pöttering springs to mind. Surely there's something to be said about a company that manages to attract the dredges of germany?

Re:Congratulation! (0, Redundant)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827203)

Where do they keep these dredges? They must be near water I guess. Don't they need those dredges in their harbors?

Re:Congratulation! (0, Redundant)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827231)

Stop holding back, tell us what you really think, he's not just and asshole he's an anonymous asshole.

Fedora (5, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | about 5 years ago | (#29827049)

In my opinion Fedora is the best distro out there, a lot nicer to use than Debian (and especially Ubuntu) too. Also their repositories contain lots of software and they're actually put there correctly - hundreds of times I've run into missing or non-working features with other distros repositories.

Seems they're actually also improving exactly what needs to be improved - graphics driver support, sound support, bluetooth support and wireless networking support. Other distros usually seem to go select just some more obscure improvements, but these should affect lots of users.

I like it.

Re:Fedora (0, Troll)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | about 5 years ago | (#29827095)

Hundreds of times? Really? That would work out to multiple times per week, every week, for multiple years (or daily for at least several months).

You sure you're not just making shit up? Or do you just really like reinstalling over and over for no reason?

Re:Fedora (5, Funny)

Stupendoussteve (891822) | about 5 years ago | (#29827175)

Theory: Every time I try to install the same broken package, it fails! I've tried hundreds of times!

Re:Fedora (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827269)

Or do you just really like reinstalling over and over for no reason?
Hey he probably runs Windows on one machine like the rest of us this just goes without saying...

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828905)

You've obviously never worked on more than one machine; try running an enterprise and you'll understand how you can have something happen hundreds of times. Last week I was trying out Ubuntu to see if it'd work better on my Dell laptop but I *repeatedly* ran into the same types of problems the GP mentions. One update I installed a bunch of audio/video software and somehow it hosed my wireless. Thinking I had installed something in networking by mistake, I reinstalled and verified 10+ times that I was only installing multimedia related software and before I knew it I was without wireless again. Monday I went back to Fedora because even though my bluetooth is hosed with it at the moment, I've never once lost wireless because I installed video software. Hell, I've never lost the use of ANYTHING on it thanks to a non-related package e.g. if I update bluez, I expect that bluetooth might die but not my video card.

Re:Fedora (0, Flamebait)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827195)

Have you tried installing Apache on Redhat if you didn't install it from the disk the first time? I gave up.

Re:Fedora (3, Informative)

StarHeart (27290) | about 5 years ago | (#29827219)

Is "yum install httpd" really that hard? I know I have done this before on plenty of servers.

Re:Fedora (-1, Troll)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827373)

Actually I meant the entire lamp stack and I had never heard of yum it's not documented very well and the application yum is not exactly named "install-missing-software" is it. I went with windows XP and the wampserver installation. Works like a charm it installs itself and was trouble free.

Re:Fedora (4, Insightful)

discogravy (455376) | about 5 years ago | (#29827455)

There's a menu item for installing software, but honestly, if you don't know what yum is and how it's used to install software in redhat-based distros -- especially if you couldn't be bothered to google it and instead thought installing windows would be easier -- windows is where you need to be. that's not meant as an insult either; linux is not for you.

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827473)

No, the problem is yum is not intuitively named and RH try to push people into their crappy package GUI. RH documentation has always sucked.

Re:Fedora (2, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | about 5 years ago | (#29827545)

Is apt-get/apt-cache then?

When you're moving to a new OS you should atleast get to know some basic things about it, and how to install software is probably the most basic one.

But even if thats too much to figure out, you have the GUI installer (not that I've ever used it)

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828115)

And THIS is why it's not the year of Linux on the Desktop.

Re:Fedora (1)

trickyD1ck (1313117) | about 5 years ago | (#29828307)

thank god!

Re:Fedora (2, Interesting)

Ephemeriis (315124) | about 5 years ago | (#29827643)

Actually I meant the entire lamp stack and I had never heard of yum it's not documented very well and the application yum is not exactly named "install-missing-software" is it. I went with windows XP and the wampserver installation. Works like a charm it installs itself and was trouble free.

You obviously didn't try too hard.

I'm by no means a *nix guru... I spend most of my time working on Windows machines... And the first thing I do when I sit down at a new computer is look for the mouse.

But it only takes about 60 seconds with a web browser [tinyurl.com] to give you a very complete, concise answer. Seriously. It is literally the first result that comes up in Google. Complete, step-by-step instructions. You don't even need to know what yum is.

Re:Fedora (0)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827711)

what exactly did you google, I couldn't even guess.

Re:Fedora (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | about 5 years ago | (#29827853)

what exactly did you google, I couldn't even guess.

"redhat LAMP install"

Re:Fedora (0)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827901)

Yeah I figure that out after I noticed the link. Wow, who'd have guessed that you had to install the c++ compiler to get a web-server and database system running. And that dependency chain was amazing.

Re:Fedora (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827957)

Oh one little detail I failed to mention. I had no access to the internet I only had the redhat install disks. Does that change how it gets installed?

Re:Fedora (4, Informative)

wastedlife (1319259) | about 5 years ago | (#29828273)

You were trying to install a webserver without internet access? Where then did you find out about and get wampserver from? On a base install of windows there is no AMP stack and nothing telling you how to install software that you are looking for.

Re:Fedora (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | about 5 years ago | (#29828559)

I've never tried Red Hat but you can use disks as repositories in Debian, Ubuntu, and openSUSE.

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828685)

Hilariously, the basic LAMP stack, sans "c++ compiler", can be installed using just:

yum install php{,-mysql} mysql-server

Alternatively, if you want all optional PHP modules as well:

yum install php\* mysql-server

Which is even easier. And yes, yum works with local install media.

Fully looking forward to the next logical step in the progression, which presumably is "I failed to mention I DIDN'T HAVE A COMPUTER"

Re:Fedora (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 5 years ago | (#29828969)

So are you a troll or an idiot?

Because with the story you are laying out here it is one or the other.

Re:Fedora (1)

ByOhTek (1181381) | about 5 years ago | (#29827495)

I thought redhat was using up2date now?

Re:Fedora (1)

sopssa (1498795) | about 5 years ago | (#29827611)

No, they changed to yum, not the other way around.

As of Fedora Core 5 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5, up2date is no longer shipped with the distribution; yum is used instead.

Re:Fedora (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827941)

Yeah, does that work from the CDs I had no access to the internet.

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827223)

By 'Apache' you mean httpd ?

yum install httpd

Re:Fedora (1)

EasyPeasy99 (1162307) | about 5 years ago | (#29827311)

Well, if you can't manage "yum install httpd", you are better off staying with Win98.

Re:Fedora (0)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827413)

Pretty sad statement but yeah if you think win98 is better than Redhat linux I guess you're right.

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827511)

In my opinion Fedora is one of the worst distros out there. Check out the number of bugs in any version of Fedora that they close as "WONT FIX" on account that a new version is released or about to be released. It's a very high percentage. The same bug gets filed for the new Fedora version but, it too, is marked "WONT FIX" because a new version is coming. Why bother actually fixing a bug when you can just ignore it and close it in six months?!

Re:Fedora (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828217)

It's got many good points. I'm running it on one computer at the moment.

It has some obvious downsides compared to Debian, though. For example, it seems to lack Debian's policy requiring all programs to have manpages, so locating documentation is sometimes tricky; a number of core programs seem not to install any documentation at all, preferring instead to refer to their websites, which is utterly useless when one wishes to refer to the manual while offline.

The software installation is also disappointing. Yum works perfectly well, and even has some advantages over apt-get, but it is so slow. There isn't a decent interface, either; yumex makes yum look fast, while the PackageKit GUI is dumbed down so far as to be essentially useless. There doesn't seem to be anything comparable to aptitude, i.e. a no-nonsense front-end that provides a powerful interactive UI even over a basic ssh connection.

The final annoyance is Fedora's constant insistence on telling me to reboot. No, Fedora, I do not need to reboot my server just because you upgraded dovecot. Restarting the dovecot service will be perfectly sufficent to make sure there aren't any stale open files or shared libraries hanging around. Sigh.

But at least it doesn't constantly "upgrade" to broken drivers and then refuse to include the fixed versions, like Ubuntu does.

Re:Great! (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | about 5 years ago | (#29827131)

If you don't like Fedora, you are free to use one of 400 other distros. [linux.org] From what I've seen of the last few releases, Fedora has done a pretty good job of improving the quality of its releases.

Re:Great! (0)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827181)

Wow, 400 that beats Microsoft six ways from Sunday.

Re:Great! (3, Insightful)

nschubach (922175) | about 5 years ago | (#29827261)

Yeah! The kicker is that none of them lock you out of features because you bought "the cheap one."

Re:Great! (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | about 5 years ago | (#29827565)

Some do though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xandros [wikipedia.org] more or less does. Then again every time I've used Xandros (usually on an EEE PC) its been a horrible experience compared to Ubuntu, Debian and even Fedora.

Re:Great! (1, Insightful)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827683)

Yeah that may be true but if you have to choose from 400 what features do they all have and how long will it take to find the ONE that has the features that I need. If none of them do, how many have ALL the features so I don't have to choose. I've been told that the beauty of Linux is that if the feature doesn't exist I can just write it myself.
What if I don't have the time, skills or money for that I'll just go with the least confusing solution I can find that has the closest feature set.

I'll trade a bit of money and lock in for the simplicity of buying it off the shelf and knowing it's a multinational company with a huge customer service department.
Just playing Devil's advocate. I've been a Linux fan since kernel version 0.29. But I just can't find a distro that works out of the box. I'm playing with Mint but even that has holes and I just can't download a .exe or a .msi that installs a feature that is missing that I need. Oh what is the command that is like yum for Mint? All the distros seem to have a different way to get missing software but I can never remember what it is and do they all actually get all the dependencies and versions correctly. I seem to never be able to guess which dependent version goes with what it is that I'm trying to install.

Re:Great! (1)

wastedlife (1319259) | about 5 years ago | (#29828581)

Most distros are based on one of the major ones but with their own little tweaks toward their purpose. This means that they all pretty much boil down to a few different package management systems, that do their own dependency and version management. Some of the major distros and the package management system used:

Debian: apt
Red Hat: yum
Gentoo: portage
SUSE: yast

I primarily use Debian or distros that are based on it, such as Ubuntu and Mint. If you have a GUI, the simplest will be the Add/Remove Programs. More powerful but still GUI-based is Synaptic. On a command-line, you will use aptitude or apt-get to install software.

With Red hat based distros, such as CentOS and Fedora, I am not quite as familiar although i do some management of a CentOS box. "yum search [query]" will help search for what application you are looking for. And "yum install [application]" will install it. My CentOS box is headless so I cannot help with the GUI portion.

Your best bet with finding the right distro for you is to think about what you are looking to do. One of the base distros will usually have everything but the kitchen sink, but you will probably need to work to get it going. If you are looking to replace your desktop, search for "desktop linux" and see what is popular. You will likely find Ubuntu or Mint. Search for network storage linux and you will probably find Openfiler. Search for linux firewall and you will probably find out about IP Cop or Smoothwall. Search for linux web server and you may find that Debian or Ubuntu Server is a popular LAMP server distro. Since most of these specialize in one area, they are usually easy to configure to do what you want. But if you want to turn something like Openfiler into a general desktop, you are going to be in for a world of hurt trying to do it.

Re:Great! (1)

Tracy Reed (3563) | about 5 years ago | (#29828871)

Linux (and other free/open source software) really only comes in one version: AWESOME [codinghorror.com] !

Re:Great! (1)

neoform (551705) | about 5 years ago | (#29827217)

They've also done a great job at banging out full digit releases frequently..

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828411)

Yeah well it would have to be really fucking broken for them to delay churning out the latest release, which they will have already stopped caring about weeks ago, when development started on Fedora 13.

Basically, from now until it gets released, nothing much will be done to Fedora 12. The time is supposed be be for testing, yet as always there will be numerous significant bugs discovered just after the final version is released, which really feel like no-one actually uses the stuff.

Re:Great! (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | about 5 years ago | (#29828839)

Yes, because release numbers actually mean something [slackware.com] .

Re:Great! (1)

hardihoot (1044510) | about 5 years ago | (#29827211)

I've used Fedora extensively and had few problems with it. I can attest that sshfs worked flawlessly for me which was my primary purpose at the time: remote web site administration. I found Fedora to be a solid distro.

The only negative I can really say about it is that the software updater would often crash my Belkin wireless router requiring a factory reboot and reload of configuration file.

Re:Great! (1)

PitaBred (632671) | about 5 years ago | (#29827343)

That's Belkin's fault. Get a router without crappy firmware, and it works fine. I've got a WRT54GL that has DD-WRT on it, and it just keeps running. The original Linksys firmware would die with any moderate torrenting or downloading.

Re:Great! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827239)

Yeah, the last thing I need is some gay hat.

Re:Great! (1)

Qalthos (1220310) | about 5 years ago | (#29827951)

Especially when I already have this kickass robe and wizard hat...

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828415)

Better news today:

  • Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala) Release Candidate is released tomorrow
  • Ubuntu 9.10 (Karmic Koala) Is released next thursday
  • Alex Jones's "Fall of the Republic: The Presidency of Barrack Hussein Obama" is released TODAY! [falloftherepublic.com]

Stay away from Fedora junk.

nice (1)

wizardforce (1005805) | about 5 years ago | (#29827007)

Time to break out the VM and try out Fedora again- if nothing else because of the sandbox and frankly, it looks like a fairly impressive release. Maybe even enough to run it right beside Kubuntu.

Re:nice (1)

WinterSolstice (223271) | about 5 years ago | (#29827665)

I'll be giving it a shot too - ironically, I support RHEL professionally, but have hated Fedora since FC8. It's not even a Gnome/KDE thing, since I use KDE on my PC-BSD laptop and Gnome on my Debian desktops.

I'm hoping to have a good experience with 12 :)

Many launches (1, Interesting)

Goffee71 (628501) | about 5 years ago | (#29827027)

First Snow Leopard, tomorrow Windows 7, new Ubuntu, now this... its like their cycles are all coming together.
Play the Windows 7 launch drinking game - here [blogspot.com]

Re:Many launches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827071)

Get off my lawn!!!

Centos 5.4 is coming soon also.

Re:Many launches (1)

IMightB (533307) | about 5 years ago | (#29828963)

redhat 5.4 has been out for weeks now.

Re:Many launches (1)

nschubach (922175) | about 5 years ago | (#29827127)

Your drinking game forgot the shot for every time someone says "Windows 7 is the best OS they've used in years." I can't believe how many times I've seen that posted (cut/paste?) all over the web.

Re:Many launches (2, Insightful)

Vancorps (746090) | about 5 years ago | (#29827183)

Windows 7 is the best OS I've used in years!

Re:Many launches (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 5 years ago | (#29828691)

Windows 7 is the best OS I've used in years, and I havn't even installed it yet! :)

Re:Many launches (1)

blitzkrieg3 (995849) | about 5 years ago | (#29827273)

Maybe Shuttleworth will eventually get what he wanted [slashdot.org] after all!

Re:Many launches (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | about 5 years ago | (#29827487)

First Snow Leopard, tomorrow Windows 7, new Ubuntu, now this... its like their cycles are all coming together.

So in a week or so, all of our OSs will have a terrible case of PMS? Yikes!

Re:Many launches (1)

DrgnDancer (137700) | about 5 years ago | (#29827677)

Fedora Core is on a six month release cycle. They always look like they're keeping current with somebody :-)

12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827085)

I'm currently running an old Slackware release, and thought I'd upgrade to a more recently-released distro today. So I downloaded this beta to give it a try, and it has failed me.

It just wouldn't boot. So I downloaded the ISO image again, checksummed it (it passed), burned it to disc again, and tried to install once more. And again it failed.

I had a similar problem years ago with one of their earlier releases, on an entirely different system. It just wouldn't boot.

Frankly, I've had enough. Fedora is shit. I don't care what features they may have added, but if the installation disc doesn't even BOOT on my systems, then it's totally useless to me.

So I'm still on Slackware for now. Maybe I'll try Ubuntu instead. I hear they actually give half a damn about the quality of their releases.

Re:12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827153)

You should definitely solely base your opinion of Fedora on 1) an incident years ago and 2) a beta version. I mean, why would anyone download and use an actual release?!? That's just crazy talk.

Re:12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827237)

Couldn't agree more with the sentiment, but as a KDE user, I'd recommend the RC of opensuse instead. Knock on wood, suse is the only distribution that *never* has failed me, and I've been through a bunch over the years.

Re:12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827359)

I couldn't agree more with you! I tried installing Fedora Core 1 on my computer yesterday after using the CD as a coaster for five years and it WOULDN'T BOOT. Fedora is obviously a piece of shit!

In all seriousness, if you don't get on with Fedora what on Earth are you thinking going for Ubuntu? What's the bettings in a week or two you'll come back complaining about the childishness of it and how they try and hide you from the guts of Linux? Stepping from Slackware to Ubuntu will be like reading Noddy books after Proust. Plus, "they actually give half a damn about teh quality of their releases"? Wow.

Wow.

Re:12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 5 years ago | (#29827379)

Was the CD burned at slowest speed setting, using media that works with other live CD .isos?

Re:12 releases and it's still a piece of shit. (4, Insightful)

jjohnson (62583) | about 5 years ago | (#29828035)

Really? You fail to do something that millions of other people do without issue, and the problem is Fedora?

Its better than windows! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827123)

There. I said it.

Re:Its better than windows! (1)

sbeckstead (555647) | about 5 years ago | (#29827147)

A poke in the eye with a sharp stick is better than windows, what are you saying?

Re:Its better than windows! (1)

longfalcon (202977) | about 5 years ago | (#29827667)

clearly you haven't used VMS.

*shudder*

Fedora vs. Ubuntu (3, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | about 5 years ago | (#29827225)

I've used Fedora since it was split off from RH, and I used RedHat going back to 5.2. For most of that time it was one of the best supported distros from the user community point of view. More recently the pendulum appears to have swung to Ubuntu. Aside from package management what are the differences I would notice by giving Ubuntu a try this time?

Re:Fedora vs. Ubuntu (2, Informative)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | about 5 years ago | (#29827625)

Lots and lots of brown, and shit that spontaneously stops working. That was just my experience, your mileage may vary. There's more to it than just package management. There are other differences when going to a Debian based distro, like managing initialization and system tools. I'd recommend OpenSUSE which also releases a new version in November.

Re:Fedora vs. Ubuntu (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827771)

I'd back that. I like openSuSE. I don't use Linux all that much anymore -- Vista on my home machine (no issues with it either; either I got lucky or problems have been overstated) and OSX on my laptop -- but the only distro I tried this time that I could properly stomach was openSuSE. I know Fedora/RedHat well from back in the RH8 days through to about FC3 or 4 from adminstering a small network of them, but for some reason I can't settle with Fedora any more, and CentOS (and Scientific Linux) irritate me. No idea why, just one of those things.

The other I'd recommend at the minute would actually be Arch, if you want a bit more hands-on than openSuSE will give you. Otherwise I'd just stick with openSuSE, it does what I want. (Or did until I got the Macbook and started using OSX.)

Re:Fedora vs. Ubuntu (3, Interesting)

dHagger (1192545) | about 5 years ago | (#29828747)

..."brown, and shit"... was that intentional?

Seriously, I have to agree about Ubuntu. I've been using Ubuntu since 6.10, and for the last few releases things have deteriorated. They are pushing things into the distribution before they are ready and/or doing a poor job integrating them. Pulseaudio has never worked OK for me. Notification OSD does not work at all for me, placing notifications outside of the visible area, and replacing a system that works fine. Multi-monitor support (except for fixed configuration in xorg.conf) has been partially broken on all the 6-8 computers I've tried it on. The beta of Kubuntu 9.10 did not have working multi-monitor support at all!

So I'm currently running Windows 7, which beats the *brown* out of Ubuntu. At least on my new shiny hardware. I'm thinking about trying another distribution, just have not decided which one yet. Fedora sounds nice (especially the thing about improved sound and video), you recommend OpenSUSE, and I've also heard a lot of good things about Mandriva. Decisions, decisions...

Re:Fedora vs. Ubuntu (1)

Anarke_Incarnate (733529) | about 5 years ago | (#29828773)

as an FYI, I used to use Mandrake and moved TO SUSE. The integration of tools is better. YaST for ease of use is near unbeatable.

Re:Fedora vs. Ubuntu (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827985)

Ubuntu isn't a steaming pile of horseshit like Fedora is.

Not a particularly exciting release (2, Insightful)

Improv (2467) | about 5 years ago | (#29827257)

For those of us who are happy with our hardware support and don't use virtualisation, there's nothing I see in this release for us. Maybe Fedora 13 will be more interesting.

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827295)

Go suckle BillG's penis you wanker

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (2, Informative)

jroysdon (201893) | about 5 years ago | (#29827389)

Looking at the list, I agree. Being a Fedora user, I tend to skip versions just because I don't want to spend the time to get all my one-offs working again. I skipped from FC6 to CentOS5 for a year on my desktop (based on the same major release versions), then went to F9, and now F11. CentOS5 is still solid and loved on my servers.

Fedora just has a twice a year release cycle they're expected to meet. That means sometimes you're just getting many incremental release updates and nothing major. I'm still curious to see what version will make it to RHEL6. I don't think they'll have time to pop out F13 to use as the foundation for RHEL6, but perhaps, since RHEL6 doesn't have to release until 2010 Q1, which could be as late as March.

Myself, I'll try it in VirtualBox and play around, but I probably won't move of my main laptop until F13. But I may try it in another LVM partition and finally blow away my left-over F9 space (I kept that partition just in case I had to dual-boot over to figure out something I'd forgotten, even though I do have backups).

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (3, Insightful)

gr8_phk (621180) | about 5 years ago | (#29827773)

I agree. My Fedora sequence has been: 3,4,5,7,9,10, and now 12. The pace of improvement has slowed down to where it's not that exciting, but that's actually a good thing IMHO it means things are "good" and "stable". I'm still unhappy that 12 doesn't seem to have the driver for e1000 wireless in the install (you can yum it from the other repo but not until final I guess). I believe that is in 2.6.32 kernel, so it should make it for Fedora 13.

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (2, Informative)

wayland (165119) | about 5 years ago | (#29828145)

Those of us with multiple GPUs (screen cards) and/or multiple input devices also have cause to rejoice.  The multi-screen-card functionality has been mostly broken in recent versions of X, and if I understand correctly, this should be fixed in a recent version of X which I understood was supposed to be in F12.  But I could be wrong.

You'll note that this is also the first version of Fedora to come with Perl 6 :). 

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (1)

Improv (2467) | about 5 years ago | (#29828395)

Hmm. Perl6 is kind of tempting, although I imagine it'll only be really interesting once people port most of CPAN over to it.

I probably should not be surprised to hear that a number of other people skip boring releases of Fedora - I don't know a lot of other Fedora users - it seems that apart from the conservative sysadmin types, most people are using Ubuntu now (well, except for the Gentoo ricers).

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (1)

armanox (826486) | about 5 years ago | (#29828601)

I don't know too many people that are still using Ubuntu - they switched to either Fedora or Debian.

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (1)

grcumb (781340) | about 5 years ago | (#29828693)

Hmm. Perl6 is kind of tempting, although I imagine it'll only be really interesting once people port most of CPAN over to it.

From the Perl6 FAQ [programmersheaven.com] :

Will I be able to use Perl 5 modules with Perl 6?

Yes; this will likely be achieved by embedding a Perl 5 interpreter, which is what Pugs, one of the prototype Perl 6 compilers, does now. The syntax for using a Perl 5 module is:

use perl5:Module::Name;

So go ahead, move on to Perl 6 and enjoy yourself.

Re:Not a particularly exciting release (1)

jeffstar (134407) | about 5 years ago | (#29828941)

Systems with NVIDIA graphics chips also gain initial support for suspend and resume functionality via the default Nouveau driver.

that seems like a big one!

Bluetooth PAN tethering support in NetworkManager (1)

shic (309152) | about 5 years ago | (#29827387)

Really? Only last week I was looking at NetworkManager - and it didn't support this - even in the development version... based upon the information I could find.

What gives?

Re:Bluetooth PAN tethering support in NetworkManag (1)

armanox (826486) | about 5 years ago | (#29827861)

Send feature request to Red Hat and Fedora teams? They wrote Network Manager afterall.

Re:Bluetooth PAN tethering support in NetworkManag (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29827931)

Works fine in the F12 beta. Teterhing my iPhone is seamless.

ATI Driver Issues (4, Interesting)

KJACK98 (623902) | about 5 years ago | (#29827563)

I've been a loyal fedora user since Fedora 8 when I made the switch to it for my primary OS. I upgraded to Fedora 11 from Fedora 8, and now my system has been constantly becoming unresponsive, even the xconfig changes mentioned on their errata page reduced the freezing but still get it randomly. As for the commercial ATI drivers, they suck and all I get is a black screen with a blinking cursor so I for one am praying they have finally resolved this issue in the next release.

Re:ATI Driver Issues (1)

oddityfds (138457) | about 5 years ago | (#29827909)

The release notes mentions an experimental ATI driver that you could try.

Re:ATI Driver Issues (1)

Segod (463725) | about 5 years ago | (#29828097)

I installed mine manually using this as a guide:
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17603 [phoronix.com]

But if you run the command:
yum install mesa-dri-drivers-experimental
it should hopefully clear things up for you.

Re:ATI Driver Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828753)

That's because you don't love KMS enough. You need to have more faith. Even attempting to configure X implies that deep down you just don't truly believe, since true believers have no xorg.conf.

Pulse Audio (3, Informative)

BassMan449 (1356143) | about 5 years ago | (#29827797)

I've used Fedora since Fedora Core 4 and am currently running 9,10, and 11 between different machines. I prefer Fedora over any other distro (having tried quite a few different ones in VMs before settling on Fedora). The only serious issue I've ever had with Fedora that I really wish would be fixed is the way the audio system works. They have tried pushing everyone over to pulse audio which overall I think is a great idea, but the problem is pulse audio isn't compatible with everything and when something tries to directly access ALSA or OSS it can break the whole sound system. So far I have had problems several times with me losing sound on my entire system with updates. I've also had it happen 3 or 4 times in a row. I know the whole ALSA, OSS, or PA debate is more than just Fedora but I think that is one of the biggest issues in all the distros that needs to be looked at and considered carefully.

Re:Pulse Audio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828851)

I have to agree with that. Audio has been so weird on Linux.

Personally I think all distros should just dump all the external complicated audio crap and go back to straight OSS. Practically everything supports OSS (it's a simple API) and the latest version of OSS supports everything ALSA/PuslseAudio/etc does. Straight, bare, plain, and simple. I can't figure out why they don't just do it already. Seems to be mostly a political issue because the OSS developers don't get along with the kernel developers or something. Bunch of freaking twits, the lot of them.

Why don't they try fixing Fedora 11 first? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828063)

How many times have you been able to do a 'yum update' or 'preupgrade' without having to worry about whether the system will be able to boot correctly?

How many times has anaconda crashed mid-install, or failed to detect your RAID and decided instead to wipe individual drives without really telling you, or any number of other nagging problems?

'Bleeding-edge' isn't an excuse by any measure; I never run into any problems when upgrading FreeBSD regularly and its ports tree stays far more current than Fedora's yum packages ever will manage.

Re:Why don't they try fixing Fedora 11 first? (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 5 years ago | (#29828317)

How many times have you been able to do a 'yum update' or 'preupgrade' without having to worry about whether the system will be able to boot correctly?

0, though I did read see warnings about some scenarios in the readmes [fedoraproject.org] . I don't know what the problem would have been as I didn't try.

How many times has anaconda crashed mid-install, or failed to detect your RAID and decided instead to wipe individual drives without really telling you, or any number of other nagging problems?

'Bleeding-edge' isn't an excuse by any measure; I never run into any problems when upgrading FreeBSD regularly and its ports tree stays far more current than Fedora's yum packages ever will manage.

0, though I don't use much RAID.

There are areas like sound which do seem to cause problems for a lot of people (though I think that's typical for most PulseAudio distros). And pushing KDE 4.0 does seem to have caused some real issues for a while. But when people claim stability problems like the ones you've described I think it's important to remember the plural of anecdote is not data.

Be weary of upgrades if your /boot is small (1)

Da w00t (1789) | about 5 years ago | (#29828667)

I was bit by the preupgrade [fedoraproject.org] CLOSED NOTABUG "bug" where preupgrade requires a sizeable chunk of (temporary) disk space in /boot during an upgrade from Fedora 10 to Fedora 11. I ended up with a system that was unbootable, but repairable. No CDROM made things .. interesting, to say the least. I use pxeboot and kickstart to do all my installs because I hate having to swap CDs/burn DVDs

I don't recall exactly what I did to work around the huge file "needing" to be in /boot, but I think I had a local copy of the install medium on disk, and softlinked the big file from /boot to where it actually resided. Then preupgrade went smoothly.

Base Fedora Version for Redhat EL 6? (1)

butlerm (3112) | about 5 years ago | (#29828765)

So, does anyone know when Redhat Enterprise Linux 6 is supposed to come out, and whether it is going to be derived from Fedora 12 or some earlier version? Redhat EL 5 is getting a little long in the tooth. The kernel is still 2.6.18 plus patches.

Most "Features" Have Nothing To Do With Fedora (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#29828831)

Most of the features announced have nothing to do with Fedora and everything to do with the Linux Kernel, the X Window System and the respective desktops. This means that any distro with these components will have these features.

What makes Fedora unique among distros? How has that changed or been improved? What has been done to integrate all that FOSS into Fedora? What patches have been applied to the Kernel? What are the admin tools? Anything new in the install process?

Just listing features of software others have independently developed tells me nothing about Fedora as a distro.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?