Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

cancel ×

171 comments

In unrelated related news... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231514)

CentOS 6 was still not released today (big surprise)

Re:In unrelated related news... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231728)

Yeah, but will it fix Slashdot's fucking 503s? You gotta a bunch of dorks running this place, or what? Cuz they sure ain't geeks, or nerds...

In related related 503 news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231932)

Hey assholes! Modding me down does NOT fix your problem! Get your shit together, would ya? Or find somebody who knows what the fuck they're doing, cuz you sure as hell don't! Incompetent fucking clowns. You're devolving back into amoebas. No offense intended to the real amoebas out there.

Re:In unrelated related news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232126)

If they can't even get things like Unicode support implemented after 14 years what luck do you think fixing bugs like that has? They couldn't even fix the bugs in the old style discussion system's pagination which shouldn't have been THAT hard to reimplement that it justified an entire rewrite of the comment system twice.

"Btrfs" (2, Funny)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231554)

The last time I heard "Btrfs" was from right behind me, after eating too many beans.

Re:"Btrfs" (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231746)

If your asshole is capable of making a "t" sound, I suggest you see a proctologist immediately.

Re:"Btrfs" (1)

clem (5683) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233320)

It's a brave proctologist who probes those depths. Making a "t" sound requires teeth.

Does it still crash all the time? (-1, Offtopic)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231568)

I haven't used it since FC4, but back then it sucked big time (they even bundled a buggy gcc version; it was impossible to compile any version of the kernel with it; oh, and the gcc project didn't publish binary version; just imagine installing gcc from source :) ).
The fact that KDE crashed 5 times as often that XP was just the tip of the iceberg. I it made me avoid Linux for a few years, and then tried Ubuntu, where my only gripe is ATI support, but it sucks for all distros.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (3, Informative)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231732)

Protip: Fedora Core 4 was released almost 6 years ago. This is ancient history in free software development terms (unless you're HURD), and you should assume any experience you had with it is irrelevant to any modern GNU/Linux distro, Fedora included.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231846)

That's why I'm asking.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231970)

So download it, try it and then come back here with the answer to your questions.
As an aside, FC4 is regarded by many as a 'bum' release.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232124)

Hi, I'm here from the Hurd anti-defamation league, and wanted to point out that while progress is slow, it's actually doing pretty well.

It's doing so well, in fact, it's *almost* ready for noobs like yourself to try:

http://www.archhurd.org/news/19/ [archhurd.org]

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (2, Interesting)

ZankerH (1401751) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233130)

This is a first for me, but mod AC parent up. This is genuine news to me and deserves exposure.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233524)

well TBH FC4 is the main reason I switched to a debian system and have never looked back, I wonder how many of us there are out there?

Not that I would not try it, but I will need a bit more persuasion than "we exist", there is plenty of that in the linux world

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

WillKemp (1338605) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231752)

So you haven't used it, and know nothinpg about it, but still feel the need to comment???

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (0)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231860)

Is a questionmark that hard to interpret?

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231956)

It helps if you don't ask your question (solely) in the subject line.

KDE !=Linux (1)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231780)

Don't blame Linux for KDE's stability issues.

Re:KDE !=Linux (1)

ehrichweiss (706417) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232144)

KDE is a lot better than Gnome 3; that's for certain. I had been using Gnome right up until this release and now I find Gnome completely unusable for my needs. Their "simplification" of the GUI was the worst idea I've seen in ages, and they don't even allow for a way to switch to the old way of doing things so I was forced to switch to KDE, which required some getting used to but overall was configurable enough to somewhat duplicate my previous environment.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231800)

cool story bro stop posting srsly

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231880)

Linux ATI support doesn't suck, ATI's linux supports sucks....well....actually it's more like it swallows.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231906)

Fedora hasn't crashed for me in .... Maybe since FC4/5.

Binary ATI support requires a non Fedora Project repo, but really it's not that hard to use your google-fu. The binary driver works just fine, don't think I've had a crash even with high FPS games.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (1)

sourcerror (1718066) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232694)

I was just curious as it's supposed to be bleeding edge, and at the time there was too much bleeding. However, I never had any luck with ATI drivers, as I tried various distros a year ago (Centos, Suse, Ubuntu; HD 3800 card). And even if I use the default driver (ie no 3D acceleration, software rendering), in Blender every second menuitem won't be rendered.

Re:Does it still crash all the time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231976)

Things have much improved since then. Fedora now features abrt, which will automatically spam redhat bugzilla with dupes of your crashes. And with F15, it can do it quicker, thanks to less debuginfo downloading.

Torrent (5, Informative)

kai_hiwatari (1642285) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231590)

The direct download was quite slow for me. Torrent was faster for me. http://torrent.fedoraproject.org/ [fedoraproject.org]

Re:Torrent (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231966)

In my experience, new releases of large FOSS projects are always very fast to torrent.

Re:Torrent (3, Funny)

Homburg (213427) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232522)

Well of course. As you can see by reading Slashdot, all of us use torrents only for seeding Linux distributions, and nothing else.

Re:Torrent (1, Informative)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232930)

Don't forget the many^H^H^H^H CC-licensed movies/TV shows, such as Pioneer 1 [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Torrent (1)

rasmusbr (2186518) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232482)

I downloaded it at full speed from the Fedora site. Maybe it is because I'm in Europe where it is late in the evening.

Re:Torrent (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233594)

I understand the karma of having a bleeding edge iso but don't most ISPs mirror such downloads?
Wait 24 hours and it'll be cached locally and 'unmetered'.

Fedora in my pants (1)

slashpot (11017) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231602)

I have Fedora in my pants.

Re:Fedora in my pants (2)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232012)

Where did you find a hat small enough for that head?

Re:Fedora in my pants (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232148)

Rob Malda's underwear drawer? *ducks*

Cool (0)

der_alte (1271174) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231618)

but I haven't yet finished fine tuning my new and shiny Kubuntu installation.

Re:Cool (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233098)

I know that you're kidding, but for those who will try it: You _can_ use the same /home partition in Fedora and *buntu, but remember to chown all your files to user 500 for Fedora or 1000 for *buntu. Same rules for all other RedHat based distros (users start from 500) and Debian-based distros (users start from 1000).

network update? (1)

softWare3ngineer (2007302) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231672)

is there a option to update over the Internet yet? switch away from fedora because it was a pain to download a new dvd every 6 months to update versions.

Re:network update? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231740)

Yes, always has been. I just prefer a clean reinstall than a update, so I just download the net install cd image.

But if you want to:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/YumUpgradeFaq

You are way out of date. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231756)

Network updates have been possible for about 10 years.

Re:network update? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231774)

yum install preupgrade
preupgrade

Posted from an F14 box that's been preupgraded since F11. My laptop at home was F13-F14-F15alpha-F15.

Its been there for a while.

Re:network update? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232208)

Please mod parent up. This is the way to go! I've done this for F12 -> F13 and just recently for F13 -> F14. Super easy!!!

Re:network update? (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232520)

+1 Informative. Thanks for the info -- I've been using Red Hat since it was called 5.2 (before Fedora Core existed) and somehow missed this option.

Re:network update? (1)

WillKemp (1338605) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231796)

is there a option to update over the Internet yet?

Yes, you can do an online upgrade. I haven't tried it though.

Re:network update? (2)

hierofalcon (1233282) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231828)

Install the pre-release package and then do

yum upgrade

Or load the new product keys into your rpm database yourself, reset your yum repo lists manually to the next release version, and execute the above command.

Usually this requires a small number of package deletions and reinstalls after the upgrade, but some work systems have been upgraded since FC1 without needing to do a new fresh install. In most cases, you can even do them live now and reboot when you're done. Occasionally you need to restart a service before the upgrade is complete, but it usually does pretty well. Be sure to try it on a test box and not a production server though. Just be sure to read the release notes first and handle all the .rpmsave, .rpmnew, and the like configuration file changes where you'd made changes from the defaults.

Still has to be done with each new release every 6 months or so. It will be nice if they ever move to a moving release structure instead that you can just keep updating, but I doubt that will ever happen.

Is it better? (1)

ADRA (37398) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231702)

I really really love the UI of the Fedora 14 GUI and of Windows 2000(much of XP), I really really hate Windows Vista/7, and I'm mostly ambivalent when it comes to the OSX philosophy. The question is, am I going to hate the new Gnome 3 look and feel, or what?

Re:Is it better? (2)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231820)

Gnome 3 almost looks like it's been optimized to be a tablet environment. I'll play with the new Gnome, but I'll have to be really impressed to switch away from KDE.

Re:Is it better? (2)

Greger47 (516305) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232150)

Exactly my impression to, I think it would be great for tablets.

But for desktop not so much, it feels like a mouse marathon back and forth over the wide-screen monitor to launch applications, switching desktops etc.

/greger

Re:Is it better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232352)

I thought so too until I figured out the keyboard shortcuts and installed alternate-tab (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Extensions/alternate-tab)
Now the UI feels very good. Certainly better than OSX, and I haven't really used Windows for awhile.

Re:Is it better? (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233554)

well if I can plop an icon on the desktop without having to make a widget or new action its already leaps and bounds over KDE 4

Re:Is it better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36234074)

You can't.

Also, icons on the desktop are a terrible way of doing things, and I for one am glad that both KDE and GNOME have moved away from them in search of better approaches.

Re:Is it better? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36234166)

But you can do that in KDE 4. Someone hasn't been paying attention.

Re:Is it better? (0)

hierofalcon (1233282) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231848)

From the comments on the Fedora Forum, I'd guess hate. I use KDE, so I really don't Kare what Gnome does.

Re:Is it better? (1)

schwep (173358) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231858)

I tried Gnome 3 with a pretty open mind (I also liked Gnome 2 interface), and couldn't cope with it. I was not able to configure anything of value to me. Despite being a Fedora contributor (just 1 package), I dumped F15 for Scientific Linux 6.

Gnome 3 would be really cool on a tablet, just not a desktop where you actually do work. In fairness, I was unable to switch to either of the other window managers (KDE, etc.).

I liked the rest of Fedora 15 because it worked well on my laptop (hardware support-wise). I just couldn't make the UI work for me.

Re:Is it better? (1)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232542)

Out of curiosity, what made you unable to switch to the other window managers? by most accounts kde is very accessible (in both kde and gnome I mainly use alt-f2 to load things so it makes no difference).

Just seems odd to switch a whole distro because one desktop manager changed.

Re:Is it better? (1)

justsomebody (525308) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232690)

ok, that has to be either worst joke ever or lame attempt at trying to post serious troll comment.

if anything... shell is abso-fucking-most configurable desktop ever. you can extend/change abso-fucking-lutely everything with simple javascript. granted, since g3 was just released, not many extensions are present yet and gnome-shell by it self is not really feature rich environment and neither was any other desktop when they switched release. moving from gnome 1 to 2 was especially terrible. old and new gtk worked and looked differently, one had utf8, other didn't... same troubles at kde camp from 3 to 4. c'mon developers need to sleep too and if they wait to release full featured version without period of change they'd need to support 2 versions.

if anything, work like that really deserves benefit of a doubt until 3.2 or 3.4. people making extensions might surprise you. just google on how to make extensions and see how brilliant it is. and yes, i do love shell... after i installed places extension and made 3 extensions for my self i can really say i was never so productive

Re:Is it better? (1)

ADRA (37398) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233196)

Self-answering my own question, I tried the distro in VirtualBox, so immediate impressions:

1. It crashed doing somewhat simple tasks (VM acceleration conflicts between NV driver, VBOX, Gnome3? I dunno, but it was annoying)
2. The title bars are retarded wastes of space, and I hate the monochromatic ways that title bars no longer stand out.
3. The navigation really does look geared toward tablets and not desktop computers... where is my Linux DESKTOP.... *sigh*
4. I really really hate the IOS check box style.. Was the classical check box SO inferior? I mean its things like that which really erk me. 'Lets change things for no good reason' Its somehow subjectively better for me (or the 3 of us) and we should all jump on it.
5. Everything was scaled way too large, so probably related to DPI issues (once again, may be because of Vbox). If the system would stop crashing, I may have found the menu setting to fix it.

To be completely honest, the best thing I liked about Gnome 3 was when it was in fail-safe fallback mode. At least then it looked like Gnome that I've loved over the years.

To me anyways, It looks like half the gnome team are in love with MAC/IOS based UI concepts. I just don't understand. If you love them so much, why not just use a mac? I love gnome for what it is, not for it to look exactly like -desktop environment of the month-.

Well ... (1)

lennier1 (264730) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231742)

Might be interesting to see how systemd will work out in something other than Arch and Debian (unstable).

Gnome 3 Shell (5, Insightful)

HRbnjR (12398) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231826)

After half an hour with the Gnome 3 Shell I *really* want my old desktop back :(

My initial impression is that all fundamental tasks, like launching apps, switching apps, switching desktops, etc, all take far more motions and/or clicks to accomplish than before. It appears as though all my app launchers have been pulled from their organized menus and dumped in a big messy pile I have to search through. And it doesn't look like I can customize the layout like I could before.

Maybe it will grow on me, maybe I will learn and adapt (I'm trying to give the Gnome dev's the benefit of the doubt here), but as it stands after my initial half an hour, I *hate* it, and I don't think I'm going to be nearly alone?

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231878)

Nope, I did as well. Trick is to stick it in fallback mode (via system settings->system info). That'll give you the familiar Gnome panels, albeit in black and without the ability to customize found in the Gnome 2.* series.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232284)

You need to hold when right clicking most of the panel stuff now.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (2, Interesting)

macemoneta (154740) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231924)

I've been running F15 since the beta. It took a couple of days to acclimate to gnome-shell. I used to run Gnome2+Compiz+AWM, so it's a considerable change. Even so, I'm quite comfortable with it now and have no intention of switching back.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

amiga3D (567632) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231926)

I was the same with Unity on Ubuntu 11.04. After playing with it in a virtual environment for a while I just said to heck with it. Maybe in a year or two it'll be okay but I think I'll stay with Gnome in 10.10 for at least 6 months. I'll revisit for 11.10 and see if they've smoothed it out because it definitely looked rushed out the door. It could be the same with Gnome 3.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232014)

You don't have to use Unity in Ubuntu 11.04. Just install xfce or your desktop of choice.

I *could* like it (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232034)

So as one who is fairly chaotic about app install, I never liked/used menus anyway, so pressing Meta, then starting to type what I want is natural. It's a fancier run dialog for me in essence.

My problem is I'm similarly chaotic about opening many windows, many tabs, many applications. Compiz and KDE4 has it just right, I can search and it will remove from the scaled window display any windows that do not match the search string. KDE and Windows 7 offers a weaker, but distinctly useful alternative of previewing all windows associated with an app icon. With only those two capabilities (the window preview on mouseover in the activities view acting like Unity on mouse click), I could get behind Gnome 3. Well, that and the ability to customize keyboard shortcuts, I have way too many nested remote desktop scenarios to conveniently take defaults (and I just prefer some things).

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

synapse7 (1075571) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232108)

I dislike the "pile" layout for launchers also. Maybe it is more intuitive coupled with a touch interface.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (2)

rlillard (571012) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232324)

I agree that it is confusing. I been running a F15 release candidate for the last month or so. There are some features of Gnome3 that have to go away and will as soon as I have some spare time to dig into it. I must point out that Gnome3 is the lesser of two evils. I began using Redhat back in the mid-90s. When Ubuntu released Dapper I switched my working desktop to it because of the reduced admin effort. My current desktop is Lucid.

About 2 months ago I heard Ubuntu was moving away from Gnome and downloaded Natty just to see what the fuss was about. That lasted about 2 weeks. I blew Natty away and downloaded Mint/Xfce. Wasn't very happy with it either. So now I'm back to Redhat/Fedora/Gnome3. For me, Ubuntu the wrong direction. Loss of the network transparent graphical environment was the final straw. If I wanted an Mac, I would have bought a Mac.

Gnome3 will take some getting used to, but I am confident I can open the hood and fix the things that drive me crazy. The first to go will be windows that maximize themselves when I push the title bar to the top of the desktop. I don't know who thought that was a good idea, but they need a dope slap.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232650)

I am confident I can open the hood and fix the things that drive me crazy.

Well, just be careful you don't kill gnome-shell twice, or too quickly, else you get the "Oh no!" screen in your face, and are invited to logout. Fortunately, if the only reason you're being forced to logout is that the bloody "Oh no" screen won't get out of the way, you can press Alt+F4 to get rid of it.

Funnily enough, there was no need for a fail whale screen before.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

dotbot (2030980) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233918)

For me, Ubuntu the wrong direction. Loss of the network transparent graphical environment was the final straw.

With future Ubuntu, are you saying that e.g. in a secure shell on another machine (ssh -Y me@othermachine) I can't run a graphical application using my X server? Perhaps I have misunderstood what you meant by network transparent. I thought any graphical environment was built on X11 and so just worked over the network...

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232464)

I've been using F15 for about a month with Gnome 3. It's a little bit to get used to, but as an interim measure, install avant-window-navigator. It puts a mac-like dock on the bottom of the screen and, as they say, Bob's your uncle.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232534)

Well, maybe you missed 'Applications' tab in Activities field, because it's all categories are available. Afaik old way of editing gnome-menu should work too.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232562)

Now it's KDE users' turn to be smug and laugh while their rivals go through a painful transition.

Maybe you should give KDE a shot, in fact. You can set it up with desktop icons and a task bar with a menu button on it, just like Gnome 2!

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232852)

I just packed up and moved over to KDE 4.6. Gnome 3 is probably great for tablets.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

mugurel (1424497) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232906)

After half an hour with the Gnome 3 Shell I *really* want my old desktop back

Personally, I have gmrun bound to a convenient key combination, and I firmly hope that will help me through the looming nuclear winter of redesigned desktops. http://directory.fsf.org/project/gmrun/ [fsf.org]

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Zappy (7013) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233042)

I can probably get used to it on my 10" netbook. It is a definite no-go for anything larger.

I will definitely select the fallback mode on my 17"laptop and for sure on my 2x 24" desktop.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36233174)

I've been using Fedora 15 since it went alpha. The Gnome 3 change was hard for me to get used to as well. However, I now prefer it to the old style.

I actually find launching apps in Gnome 3 to be much faster and easier than with Gnome 2:

- hit the super key (or windows key)
- start typing the name of the app (sometimes typing what the app does works, too: for example, "browse", for Firefox or the "Image Viewer")
- when it appears in the list, either use the arrow key to move over to the app if you have a few options, or just hit enter if it's already selected

See, no mouse needed!

Gnome 3 does have some failings. I use two monitors. If I move a window to the second workspace, only the left monitor actually will show the new workspace. The right monitor continues to display the apps from the first workspace instead of displaying only the desktop (or the app I just moved there). I can't tell if this is a feature or a bug. 8/

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233792)

See, no mouse needed!

Yes, we're back to the glory days of DOS and command-line Unix.

If the fastest way to start a new program in your GUI is to guess the name and type it in, then you're doing something wrong.

Re:Gnome 3 Shell (1)

Jim Hall (2985) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233506)

I experimented with the Beta, and I like the usability in Gnome Shell. I find it very natural. Yes, you have to "let go" of some things you learned on Gnome 2, but you need to "let go" of certain concepts whenever you switch from Windows to Linux, or Windows to Mac, or Mac to Linux. One feature that hooked me was how open windows (your "activities") are represented. It's sort of like MacOSX's Espose, move your mouse to "Activities", and it shows everything. From there, you can also open new "activities" (programs). It's an all-in-one menu that makes a lot of sense.

I had the Beta installed on a USB flash drive, and I'd boot into that sometimes. When I'd boot back to Fedora 14 (or Windows 7) I felt like the old desktops were primitive.

And I'll also add that the font rendering in Fedora 15 is awesome. Fonts looked great on earlier versions of Fedora, but they look smoother and easier to read in the new desktop. Not sure if I should credit a change in Fedora's preferred font rendering, or if this is an improvement in Gnome 3.

Gnome Shell (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36231888)

Personally, I like Gnome3, but I have a feeling this release is going to irritate a lot of people. There's no way to go back to gnome2 (afaik) and the fall-back mode falls far short of including all of the features gnome2 had. OTOH, systemd rocks and is what SMF on solaris _should_have_been_. Using XML AND shell boilerplate to replace just shell boilerplate in SysV init was monumentally retarded. The new service script syntax is concise, short, and is what a good init should have been for many years now. Built-in dbus integration and process handling eliminates the need for folks to include syslog output (print to stderr, dbus will pick it up and forward it), or any of the BS process parent/pty/forking/daemonizing that everything does now. I've been on F15 since alpha and I'm loving it.

Just installed it and... (3, Interesting)

hey (83763) | more than 2 years ago | (#36231898)

...I like it. The faster .drpm alone is worth it.

Re:Just installed it and... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232168)

And one day, they might even have something like debian's packaging setup.

Seriously... why does anyone put up with this crappy distro, it's slow package manager, and it's poorly maintained, tiny repos anyway?

Hate to say it... (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232294)

But delta rpms are nice and I don't know (haven't seen) equivalent stuff crop up in apt. apt/deb was light-years ahead in the beginning, but yum/rpm has more or less caught up and even has some nice stuff missing from apt/deb (though yum incessantly refreshing the metadata by default annoys me personally, increasing time to install a package unnecessarily).

Re:Just installed it and... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232686)

What are the terrible things that yum does? I mean, in 2011, not 2003 or whenever you are thinking of. Regularly using both apt and yum, I find myself either ambivalent about which is better, or being slightly happier with yum's searching and informational capabilities (at least the ones that don't require reading the whole man page to find out about).

As for the desktop design... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232050)

The desktop design is awesome. Since my first step into the linux world around '02, I loved the concept of virtual desktops and the "pager". I first started to use it with enlightenment at that time.

Either way the concept is pretty simple. You use 1 virtual desktop for one task sort of speak. My own personal example would be;

Desktop 1: 4x terminals
Desktop 2; IRC & IM
Desktop 3: File Manager
Desktop 4: Browser
Desktop X: Whatever application you want to use.

If you also save the session, everything will start up where you left it. Perfect! To me the design decision that the Gnome team has made towards this is awesome to say the least. There's a few oddities in regards to the UI but it's either themeable or modifiable.

I will also use this opportunity to say that the spatial file manager design they came up with a few years back was retarded. With a metaphor of putting stuff in drawers. Christ. Talk about thousand mouse-clicks of death.

Either way, this is a smooth try at using the desktop like I have for years. Congrats!

Re:As for the desktop design... (1)

kvvbassboy (2010962) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232718)

My setup is quite similar to yours, and I see what you mean. The notification system, and saving the session is awesome. Personally, I thought it was better than Unity in terms of looks, direction and the fact that they want to do something unique.

But, it severely lacks an easy way to get an overview of your desktop, and it overall requires too many finger/mouse gymnastics.

Some changes like providing an "expo" like feature will be nice. Giving a list of applications running in the current desktop on the bottom panel would be great too. It could turn out to be a great desktop for my personal use, with a few changes. But, for now, I am most comfortable with Gnome 2.32 and KDE 4.6.

On a side-note, systemd provides highly noticeable benefits to the boot time, and it is not as memory intensive as some people make it out to be. I would say about 600 MB for parent's setup.

Re:As for the desktop design.. (1)

fwarren (579763) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233886)

On the other hand, it does not work for me. I use a desktop setup much like the parent poster does. The problem lies in the fact that all of these apps MUST be started up. If for any reason whatsoever you close out the final app on a desktop or the final app on a desktop crashes, that desktop goes away and the other desktops "shift" up by one. Now the Browser is no longer on desktop 4, it is on desktop 3.

In addition to that I use ctrl+alt+left and ctrl+alt+right to move between desktops, and having the ability to wrap around from 4 back to 1 or from 1 back to 4 is nice. The way Gnome shell uses ctrl+atl+up and ctrl+alt+down and the lack of desktop wrapping is an issue for me.

With Fluxbox I am able to do the following right out of the box:

Ctrl+Fx = goto desktop
Winkey+Fx = send app to desktop
Ctrl+Winkey+Fx = goto deskop WHILE sending app to desktop

Ctrl+Alt+left/right = goto next/prev desktop
Winkey+left/right = send app to next/prev desktop
Ctrl+Winkey+left/right = goto next/prev desktop WHILE sending app to desktop

Without even taking my fingers off of the keyboard I have more control over my virtual desktops in a program written a decade ago than I do with Gnome Shell. Along with the ability to set shortcut keys for launching apps like:
  ctrl+alt+c = calc

Or chaining keys such as ctrl+alt+k (for KDE) thus:
ctrl+alt+k+b (for browsing, bring up konqueror)
ctrl+alt+k+c (for kcalc)
ctrl+alt-e (for editor, kate)
ctrl+alt+s (for shell, konsole).

Along with the ability to have rules for where windows end up or being able to set up a keyboard shortcut to start a program if it is not running, and if it is running, either to bring the program to my current desktop, or to switch to the desktop where the program is currently running at. I can also run Dock Apps for launchers, pagers, utilities, status indicators, and clocks instead of being forced into app indicators. I have seen nothing better than wmmsg http://www.dockapps.org/file.php/id/169 [dockapps.org] at letting me know I received an IM while I was gone. As long as I am at a desktop and not a hand held tablet, Fluxbox beats Gnome Shell 3 hands down. I have a 6 year investment in my keyboard shortcuts that Gnome Shell can not match.

The funny thing is all of the stuff they are doing to bring virtual desktops so front and center that users can't help but use them, kills off a lot of the usefulness of virtual desktops.

LLVMpipe? (1)

suy (1908306) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232200)

Has some Fedora user tried LLVMpipe with some desktop apps that require OpenGL (like Gnome Shell)?

LLVMpipe is supposed to bring CPU-based rendering to apps that otherwise would require a working graphics card with OpenGL support. Seems backwards at first, but it would be a more coherent experience: if you don't have working graphics drivers, you have the same experience (slower), instead of a fallback mode, or a different implementation (like Unity 2D instead of the "normal" Unity).

It could also pave the way for Qt 5 apps, because Qt 5 is going to require OpenGL too. If LLVMpipe works decently it would be an improvement for developers. They could use OpenGL features to make their lives easier, without worrying too much about if the user has proper drivers.

Re:LLVMpipe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232680)

My understanding is that LLVM pipe is a work in progress and as such, hasn't implemented the parts of the Open GL spec that the 3d window managers use.

Lamo's will be upset. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36232220)

Lamo's like OSGUI will be mad because he doesn't know command line lol.

GNOME 3 at it's glory; Fedora strenghts/weakneses (1)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232758)

First of all, I installed Fedora 15 alpha/beta because I wanted to try GNOME Shell in production. If you have tried Ubuntu GNOME 3 team PPA, you'll know what I mean. It is also a problem because Ubuntu 11.04 lacks lot of depencies necessary for smooth sail (like NM 0.89/0.9 beta).

Nevertheless, I'm quite familiar with all kind of distros (10 years on Linux Desktop...ohh...it is that long already?), so Fedora isn't something new for me. It was also interesting to see what have changed over the years.

First of all, Fedora has solid repository system, using yum. Adding repositories are very easy (using special rpms with distribution configuration files for yum), and software is more or less up to date. It is huge change from antique rpm command only system. RPM Fusion repository fills your "evil side" needs like commercial codecs and software :) Also delta rpms are very interesting concept and while building delta change list requires some time for descent system, download size is cut seriosly, so this technology definitely has a future.

Fedora 15 ships GNOME 3 almost unchaged, in it's full glory. It makes sanse if we remember which paid for GNOME 3 development in first place. This is also reason why it makes sense to try in on Fedora.

I will skip detailed analysis about why I like GNOME 3 (or GNOME overall). Mostly because why I'm all for freedom to change your desktop at your will, I don't like to do it myself (too much real life I suppose). Anyway, while concept (for GNOME Shell that is) seems to be strange and you need to relearn some motor skills, it pays back after several weeks. Mostly GS works because it is very simple - top panel (you can't change it), Activities view with dock and that's mostly it. I'm surprised that I really like switching between apps using Activities view. with few windows it feels like too much, but with ten it definitely helps Also Alt+Tab with Alt+` is very nice touch (especially when you talk on phone and try to find app with another hand using Alt+Tab).

In overall I really love it. When I heard that Canonical will make Unity default as I was saddened because I thought it is the end for GNOME 3. Well, it doesn't - and if Canonical won't start deliver soon with Unity and someone will make serious effort to make good distro with GNOME 3 as default, Mike will have to run for his money.

live media (1)

mathfeel (937008) | more than 2 years ago | (#36232992)

Why are all main stream distribution still only release their live/install media in CD/DVD image file? Why not USB? The only distro that I know of offers that is Arch. I have at least two laptop that doesn't have an optical drive. Yes, I can use UNetbootin to make one, but in this day and age, why not just offer an image? Why are we still burning onto write-once media (few, if any, use cd-rw for this purpose?) like cdr/dvdr that become obsolete when a new version comes out and are really toxic to the dumpster.

Side question: what is the proper way to throw away cdr/dvdr's?

Re:live media (1)

halfline (48947) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233074)

Why are all main stream distribution still only release their live/install media in CD/DVD image file? Why not USB?

you can put the fedora live isos on usb sticks. You either dd if=iso of=/dev/sdb1 or use liveusb tools to get a read-write overlay that persists across reboots.

Re:live media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36233116)

Put 'em in your microwave for 3 sec, after bbrrzz show, throw away. Disclaimer: I live in TN, that is the "proper" way. Improper would be to whirl it out back of the trailer.

Re:live media (2)

bfields (66644) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233162)

Look over to the right of the download page. Note where it says "To install Fedora using a USB stick, follow these instructions."

(Also note the command line version of the instructions amount to just dd'ing your choice of iso images onto a usb stick.)

Depends on how technical you are (1)

Sits (117492) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233246)

As another reader pointed out, you can put a Linux ISO on to a USB stick. I know Fedora and Ubuntu both come with tools to do just this. Another option that has been supported for as long as I've been using Linux distros has been net booting - you download a tiny image and then install over the network. If you can do bootp you don't even need to put the small image on the machine using removable media.

Finally something I learned is that you can quite bootstrap an install CD if you have the technical chops and a machine which has a bootloader that lets you boot arbitrary kernels. You typically unpack the ISO to a spare partition, grab the vmlinuz and initrd/initramfs and then boot that and pass the options that let it know which partition contains the rest of the install. It was initially very painful to learn how to do this but it does mean you don't need any new media on machines which have something like grub already working (or you can put grub on a USB device and then boot off that).

Re:live media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36233700)

Fedora provides a graphical utility for making a bootable Fedora USB drive. It's already included as part of Fedora 14.

Seems half baked to me (1)

Thalaric (197339) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233782)

I hate to say it because I'm a big fan of gnome and fedora, but from a technical standpoint this release is really sub par. I've had more problems with installation with 15 than any I can remember in recent history.

- For the first time the installer requires more than the 512gigs of ram on my laptop, had to do a network update
- new kernel won't detect network card on PC, had to force latest fedora 14 kernel to get online
- Oh look, evolution changed it's mail folder structure and decided to delete all my existing email
- Random freezes when doing large file transfers??
- Now my PC hangs indefinitely on reboot unless I hit the power switch
- Gnome shell is a little clunky but its growing on me. To bad they removed every menu option to turn off the computer except the oh-so-useful Suspend... the option every computer needs except the vast majority that aren't laptops

Re:Seems half baked to me (1)

fwarren (579763) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233942)

The brain trust at Gnome knows better than us end users. The most intuitive way to do things is to have suspend option that changes to a shutdown option when you hold down your ALT key.

Brilliant, no wonder I am just an end user. I could never ponder such transparency.

Re:Seems half baked to me (1)

Thalaric (197339) | more than 2 years ago | (#36233956)

s/512gigs/512megs/

Re:Seems half baked to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36233990)

Try holding down alt when trying shutdown, the suspend will switch to shutdown.

Fedora and NVidia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36234192)

Has Fedora done anything about problems concerning NVidia cards? I tried 12,13, and 14 but X kept freezing on me with either the proprietary driver or nouveau. I haven't had such problems on other distros, but no such luck on Fedora. I have used the tricks I found in the forums but none worked well.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...