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 16 Released

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the that-is-one-large-hat dept.

Red Hat Software 125

Karrde712 writes "Fedora 16 has just been released, bringing with it Gnome 3.2, KDE 4.7, GRUB2 and more!" Here are the full release notes; most users will probably want to jump to the list of changes for desktop users.

cancel ×

125 comments

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

With Gnome 3 (0, Troll)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#37986922)

so forget it.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987006)

... because it's just UNPOSSIBLE to put whatever desktop environment you want on it. I'm waiting for Beefy Miracle just for the sake of the name.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987042)

i thought fedora releasenames are quite cool. but beefy miracle is just silly. All versions before had a nice sounding codename, and now something that silly. i wonder what they put up next, they need to have a similiarity with the previous one (the beefy miracle) there.

on the rest ... yeah, kde on fedora is pretty much okay. other (more minimalistic) WMs of course, too.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988024)

Beefy miracle is F17.
F16 is called Verne (hence the underwater wallpaper)

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

TheGoodNamesWereGone (1844118) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991982)

I thought it was because of Ernest T Worrell! (Hey Vern!) Installing it now in a VM to test it out...

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

haruchai (17472) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988864)

That's not due until May 2012 so let's hope they change it - it's really dumb. But it might boost their popularity in Texas

Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987076)

Perhaps the problem with GNOME 3 is that GNOME 2 will no longer have the support of the GNOME Foundation behind its continued development, and it might take too long to build up the financial wherewithal to establish a Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation.

Re:Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation (1)

keitosama (990483) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988384)

GNOME 2 has been forked as MATE [github.com] by an Argentinian weeaboo, but it's still in a very early stage without much else than code migration and rebranding going on at the moment. Maybe more contributors will join in and help build a proper infrastructure for the project later, time will tell.

Is MATE still alive? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989920)

A good few sites are saying that after a burst of enthusiasm, the project seems to have stalled.

Re:Fork-of-GNOME-2 Foundation (1)

Tolleman (606762) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989736)

Wouldn't it be better to do more job on the fallback mode then to keep going on GNOME 2? Granted, GNOME 3 has some annoying dependencies. But the removal of bonobo and so on are rather nice pros.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987094)

... because it's just UNPOSSIBLE to put whatever desktop environment you want on it.

Given a choice between installing Random Distro X and having to build and install a completely new desktop environment or installing Random Distro Y which is sane out of the box, why would anyone pick the former?

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987180)

sudo yum install kde

Re:With Gnome 3 (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987944)

kheres kome khing kbout kde khat kust kothers khe khit kut kf ke.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989554)

How does that pick b/w kde 3.5 vs 4.7?

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991452)

Because to install 3.5.x (as Trinity) you need to add a seperate repository, then yum install trinity-desktop.

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987274)

Who said anything about "build"? 1. Open package manager. 2. Select desktop meta-package 3. Reboot, select DE at login screen. All done, no "build" involved. Or wait a coupla days for a respin in the de you want. You're giving Gnome 2 users a bad name, whether your ignorance is rhetorical or real. Oh, and "completely new desktop environment" ? Gnome 2x is old, as in completely old. That doesn't mean it's bad, but does mean that it isn't new, and most certainly not "completely new".

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

drjones78 (961270) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987318)

sudo yum groupinstall XFCE
sudo yum groupinstall LXDE


Or just use Gnome 3 - I've never heard so much irrational complaining over what is a pretty solid (and very customizable) desktop etc....

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

ArcherB (796902) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987442)

Or just use Gnome 3 - I've never heard so much irrational complaining over what is a pretty solid (and very customizable) desktop
etc....

Can you put a system monitor on that bar that runs across the top to display processor usage per core, temperature per core, processor frequency per core and ram in use?

If you can, without adding some third party repo, let me know how. I'm running XFCE4 and Trinity, but neither seems as complete or polished as Gnome2.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

drjones78 (961270) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987522)

sudo yum install gnome-shell-extension-cpu-temperature

Not sure that takes care of all your requirements, but it gets you at least somewhat there.
Fedora packages a lot of extensions for gnome-shell - I expect that the number and quality of them will only get better and better.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1, Interesting)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988990)

It's undeniably getting there. It will take time, but it's getting there. Take a gander at what Linux Mint did with Gnome3 using extensions. Sure looks like [linuxmint.com] it's gonna work [linuxmint.com] as good as Gome2 to me. Never thought I would be saying this as early as this. I didn't have high expectations at all.

Re:With Gnome 3 (3, Informative)

kramulous (977841) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989192)

Doesn't quite meet you requirements, but let's hope it does soon. You probably know about it but anyway : Try this [github.com]

I find that it is a bit hit and miss on machines (not always works) but when it does, it works well.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

FunkyELF (609131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987520)

XFCE and LXDE don't have all the administration tools that Gnome3 has. No utility to configure fingerprint readers (my laptop has one) for example.

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988678)

XFCE and LXDE don't have all the administration tools that Gnome3 has. No utility to configure fingerprint readers (my laptop has one) for example.

Most administration tools are just gui over command line utilities anyway.
For the moment use the command line utilities, in the future I'm sure some entreprising soul will make a graphic front end that doesn't depend on gnome.

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988248)

Yea, I will ride Gnome fallback (2.9xx) until fedor 17 then i'll switch to LXDE. Screw those PowerPook onwing OSX using developers at the GNOME foundation. GNOME will wither and die. Infiltrate the gnome foundation with rogue programmers and make the gui un-usable for any thing but watching movies (check), start a half-hearted attempt at forking GNOME 2.x which will eventually merge with GNOME 3 (mate). Witness the beginning of the rise of LXDE as the most popular gui.

ever try it, or you just post what you THINK works (0)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988576)

nope, certain gnome dot files will screw up xfce4. you'd have to remove GNOME desktop first, and then delete some dot files in home directory. the truth is that fedora is geared to about two desktops and xfce isn't one

Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989010)

Uh, yeah, I tried it in other Fedora releases, and didn't happen to run into those problems. I could log into Xfce, Gnome, KDE, and LXDE in turn using a login selector without any problems.

Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo (1)

nirik (5709) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989232)

I can't imagine any case where this would happen.

Have you reported any bugs on it? Not against Fedora Xfce apparently, since I've never seen them (I'm one of the Fedora Xfce maintainers).

Re:ever try it, or you just post what you THINK wo (0)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990154)

guess you don't read the fedora forums, then

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

xaoslaad (590527) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987324)

yum groupinstall Xfce
or KDE, or LXDE, or...
really now... so hard...

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987764)

Anyway of doing a groupinstall for Gnome2?

wrong (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988550)

you will have all manner of problems if you still have GNOME and its files around. the proper way would be to uninstall GNOME desktop and erase all the dot files that could fuck xfce up, and there are a few. I tried Fedora as one possibility to fleeing ubuntu, but quite frankly the alternative desktops either aren't as well stocked for serious admin of the machine, or have conflicts

Re:wrong (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989026)

Maybe. But funny thing - I did just that in the past without any problems.

Re:wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989078)

I have both installed and use Xfce with absolutely no problems. I've done this on Debian and Fedora without a single issue.

Re:wrong (1)

nirik (5709) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989268)

Not the case. Many people have GNOME/KDE/Xfce/LXDE installed. Simply select which you wish to use on login...

Re:wrong (1)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990330)

it is the case, things in .config .local and .X* can cause problems. I've seen this going from ubuntu to xubuntu, fedora GNOME to xfce, debian with gnome to xfce

Re:wrong (1)

xaoslaad (590527) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992518)

Funny. I have Gnome installed without issue. I will grant you I have never logged into it, so no dot files in my homedir, but otherwise no issue. I use NetworkManager, gnome-bluetooth, and gnome-audio-control (do not like the Xfce applet) in the notification area, so I can't fully uninstall gnome, For some reason I think at least one requires gnome-session, so I can get about as far as removing gnome-session-xsession so it does not show up as an option in LXDM.

Re:With Gnome 3 (3, Interesting)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987204)

Ok, if you insist.

Fedora has nearly always been extremely quick (sometimes too much so) to adopt new software and features. It would be shocking if they didn't have Gnome 3. Most of the time, this means Fedora is the most technically advanced major Linux distro. It also makes it one of the buggiest. Don't use it if you don't want to play around with cutting edge new Linux software (versions). Simple as that.

Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987530)

Fedora 15 had gnome 3 as well. Might as well stop trolling.

Re:With Gnome 3 (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987812)

so forget it.

So just install KDE already. KDE 4.x has been usable for years.

In any case, this is reason enough for me to start performing Fedora installs:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/16/html/Release_Notes/sect-Release_Notes-Changes_for_Sysadmin.html#id1439594 [fedoraproject.org]
That means seamless user sharing between F16 and Debian-based distros.

Gnome3 a deal breaker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988038)

I'm not exactly a newbie; I've run every release of Fedora since the beginning, and compiled my own RH distributions before that - I'm one of the original RHCEs (Feb 2000). Like most people, I was very shocked and frustrated when F15 came out with Gnome3 and found that I lost a lot of functionality because of the new desktop that is being geared towards tablets and ignores the rest of us. At least with the fallback mode and some add ons I could get close to previous functionality, but the app bar is long gone. My temptation at the time was to fall back to F14. I've learned my lesson, I won't automatically upgrade, but load to a VM first.

Re:Gnome3 a deal breaker (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988320)

That's what I've done - stayed on F14. I'm planning on checking out 16, but, I don't like a lot of the changes they've been making (systemctl can DIAF).

Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 (2)

Nivag064 (904744) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988346)


Applefication (The doctrine that designers know better than users, and that users should not worry their tiny little minds about how to configure something to be useful for them) of desktops and applications may be fine for Sheeple, but not for people who want to get the most out of their desktops.
GNOME 3 is a total disaster, it is simply unworkable for people who actually want to do serious work - unless your use of a computer is somewhat trivial and you're happy with what appears to be something that seems to be based on a mobile phone interface for large screens.

GNOME 3 is a triumph of fashion over functionality.

As Linus, and others have said, xfce is better than GNOME 3, but not as good as GNOME 2.

What are they smoking? Were they bought out by Apple or Microsoft???

Re:Applefication of the Desktop - Re:With Gnome 3 (0)

dmbasso (1052166) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990278)

I had a similar opinion before I started using Gnome 3. Now I know that Gnome 3 is all about extensibility. They are in the right path, IMHO.

That said, I agree that right now it really sucks.

Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie (4, Informative)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987056)

It should be noted in the article.

Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989028)

Who?

Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie (2)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989116)

Dennis Richie co-invented the C programing language and Unix. He also wrote the definitive C programing book of its time.

Re:Dedicated to Dennis Ritchie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989972)

He... oh never mind. He didn't run Apple so who gives a shit.

Grub2? (2)

ichthus (72442) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987118)

They're actually listing grub2 as an UPGRADE?

Re:Grub2? (4, Funny)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987558)

Just wait until GRUB3 comes out. You won't even need to boot an OS with that. The question is whether GRUB3 will include Xfce or just be GNOME only.

Re:Grub2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987622)

GRUB3+GNOME+EMACS takes care of all your OS needs.

Re:Grub2? (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987634)

They're actually listing grub2 as an UPGRADE?

Start a new bootloader project and call it GRUB3 and people will just switch to it because it has a bigger number.

Re:Grub2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987752)

Fuck it, we're doing GRUB5!!

Re:Grub2? (1)

John Bresnahan (638668) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988338)

I'm going to do Grub11...

Because it's one more!

Re:Grub2? (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989608)

Why, has Mozilla taken over ownership of Grub?

Re:Grub2? (1)

greed (112493) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988326)

GRUB2 is certainly an upgrade for EFI-based systems. I had to download and build my own copy of GRUB2 to run Fedora from an external USB disk on a Mac. (The Bootcamp BIOS emulation thing only allows use of the first internal disk. And it means you're still dealing with BIOS.)

The GRUB2 BIOS systems I'm running seem to behave themselves, but that's only a couple of test VMs.

Re:Grub2? (1)

notandor (807997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989574)

After reading the Fedora 16 release notes and the info that Fedora 16 uses GPT (GUID Partition Table) instead of the old MBR style, i am rather confused.

It seems that on all non-UEFI systems (like my Thinkpad T510), a separate, small 1 MB "BIOS Boot Partition" needs to be created, which is not the same as a partition on /boot.

Is this extra "BIOS Boot Partition" partition really necessary on non-UEFI machines? Why cant we use /boot for that?

Re:Grub2? (1)

StarHeart (27290) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988400)

I hear you, it does feel like a downgrade. On the other hand, grub1 is not working for me. I upgraded to Fedora 16 last night. At first GRUB2 gave me simply "GRUB", and GRUB1 gave me "Error 16". I tried multiple tricks to get GRUB1 working, and was unsuccessful. What I finally ended up having to do was use GRUB and make the empty space at the beginning of the drive 2047 blocks instead of the previous 62. To do this I had to backup the contents of /boot, repartition, redo raid1, format it, and copy the data back.

I also recently ran into the Error 16 error with GRUb1 on Fedora 15 on my mail/web server. To workaround it I ended up installing GRUB2 from Fedora 16.

Re:Grub2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991286)

I have no problem with grub2 on the F16 partition. I had grub1 installed on my boot partition and just chain load F16'S grub2. My other desktop is a dual boot Win7/F16 setup, and grub2 installed to the mbr without problems

Linux is dead! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37987418)

netcraft confirms it!

Re:Linux is dead! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988682)

Like you Netcraft is a Troll. So get on your troll-cycle and be off with you.

Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (4, Informative)

Nighttime (231023) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987438)

Fedora torrents are located here [fedoraproject.org] .

Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (1)

IMightB (533307) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987786)

Damn leachers, I'm getting 700k up and I'm only at 74%

Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (1)

IMightB (533307) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987796)

Sorry html formatting snafu, should be -lt 200k down and -gt 700k

Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988202)

I'm getting 24mbps down and only putting 4mbps up right now. It's not because my connection is asymmetric either, there is just an overabundance of seeders on the 64bit DVD torrent.

Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988436)

I noticed the torrent was up last night and got it early... now I'm serving up avg. 80 Mb/s from my workstation but may have to shut it down after lunch (PST), assuming nobody at work gets cranky before then.

Too bad bittorrent-ncurses forgets its stats every time I restart it with a different upload cap. Not sure how much I've served total in the last 12 hours, but latest run is about 80GB in the last 3 hours.

Re:Spare the mirror sites, use the torrents (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988894)

Total download time was 17:30. Still only uploading at ~2.4mbps despite having plenty of bandwidth available. Looks to me like the torrent is pretty well seeded at this point.

Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (2)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987526)

,,, were it not for Gnome by default. But I've yet to see anything (and it would take a lot, so I'm not expecting it) to overcome their overly short support cycles. I need something better to use this at work, for either the desktops (we only use Windows where there is absolutely no other choice, which makes a grand total of 2) or the servers (0). But even Ubuntu's slow (in some cases) security updates are starting to bother me (over an issue they haven't yet updated in my one-version-behind system even though Slackware fixed the same one over a month ago in versions all the way back to 2007).

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (1)

mx+b (2078162) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987644)

Personally I like OpenSUSE. Not quite as fast a release cycle but enough to keep up. Terrific KDE implementation (which is the default) and you can find package repos for nearly anything, and they update issues very rapidly. Just this morning it updated me to Firefox 8, before 8 was even listed on Mozilla's website. I had no idea it was released yet! They're really on top of things and can't wait for their next release next week.

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (1)

drjones78 (961270) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987674)

Try a distro that tracks with RHEL, like CentOS or Scientific Linux? Or there's always vanilla debian.

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988624)

You know, or RHEL itself.

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989088)

Yeah, because it's REALLY hard to type "yum install kde-desktop" (package spelling might be a bit off on this release, but it's as simple as that) and get a coffee.

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37990882)

You know, you can download another spin (KDE / XFCE) if you want a default DE other than GNOME -- or god forbid, use the package manager.

Re:Maybe nice for a home desktop ... (1)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 2 years ago | (#37991176)

But I've yet to see anything (and it would take a lot, so I'm not expecting it) to overcome their overly short support cycles.

if support cycles are important, then Fedora isn't for you. It's intended to be the latest, cutting-edge software which itself takes so much time and energy to put together that supporting older versions becomes a drain on newer version development. It's essentially Red Hat's public test lab, and one of the reasons that they don't formally support upgrading between distros (especially not in cases like F16 where so much of the support architecture has changed in one release).

More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

Trix (5592) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987694)

GNOME 3, systemd, autokey, just to name a few. Now they're saying that everything belongs in /usr/bin.

Those who don't understand UNIX are doomed to re-invent it, badly. Evidently, as Fedora.

Maybe I'm just getting too old for this, but I'd rather have improvements in the tools that work than to have to learn a completely new tool every year because somebody decided that the old way is wrong because they didn't invent it. I guess Vim will be on the block next.

Are we, as a community, absolutely certain that "release early, release often" is always the best way to go?

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987826)

If you don't like people moving things around, just be glad you never tried GoboLinux. Personally I quite like it, but you do have to negotiate a completely new system tree. Moving things into /usr/bin is tame in comparison.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

fatboy (6851) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988428)

You do understand the reason why we have a /usr/bin and /usr/sbin , right?

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989542)

Because most 'nix users are still living in the 1970's?

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37990050)

No

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

boristhespider (1678416) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992056)

I'm not arguing for changing from splitting into /sbin and /bin - I was just mentioning a Linux with far more extreme changes than those that Fedora make, mainly for interest's sake. I've got no issue with keeping /usr/bin, /sbin, /usr/sbin and /usr/local/bin separate, though I must admit it's not something that keeps me awake at night. (Likewise anything under /opt/bin, /opt/local/bin, or any other binary directory you choose to include.)

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

qualityassurancedept (2469696) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988016)

You don't have to upgrade at all, of course. If your system works and you have no problem with it, then you can just keep what you have.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (2)

IMightB (533307) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988122)

I'll bet you still have DrDOS and Windows for Workgroups with MS BOB on your servers.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

StuffMaster (412029) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990310)

MS BOB on a server...that seriously makes me LOL.

LOLBOB.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

curious.corn (167387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37992048)

Troll... ... or just in case you're not:

1. you never had to quickly restore a production DB by shoving the /var disk set into another server haven't you?
2. yen never had to painstakingly twiddle a broken server using statically linked /bin /sbin, binaries?

Kids these days, they think all there is to UNIX is a LAMP image on the Cloud...

I must admit systemd rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988284)

I may be a gnome(3) hating "refusenik" curmudgeon, even I have to admit that systemd seriously rocks. It's a massive step forward and very unix friendly. It even has excellent man pages (something nothing fedora has added this decade except selinux has)

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988430)

systemd is a huge step forward. sysvinit and BSD-style init aren't exactly the pinnacles of design and neither of them cope well with parallelization. On top of that, cgroups support, socket activation, snapshotting, and dependency-based service control are huge wins. As a BSD user, systemd is one of the few features I'm actually jealous of. It's nice to see RedHat pushing interesting technologies because the only other interesting technology coming out of the Linux community is BTFRS.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (1)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988488)

This is Fedora. When accused of being a testbed for RHEL, their devs respond by claiming that no Fedora is a testbed for much more. Fedora has never claimed to offer a stable desktop system, so I don't know why you'd complain it not providing a stable desktop system.

Re:More fixing of things that weren't broken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37989100)

Are we, as a community, absolutely certain that "release early, release often" is always the best way to go?

It only makes sense if you release your distribution with the understanding that it is nothing more than an extended testing platform for various technologies you hope to incorporate into your enterprise product within a few years.

quick tip (1)

nimbius (983462) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987762)

for those upgrading via preupgrade, make sure to have at least 70% free space in boot or it will fail with an out of space error on the reboot.

Re:quick tip (1)

Gazzonyx (982402) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990438)

Thanks for the heads up. This is a stupid bug to have, but in my experience Anaconda and preupgrade fail about as often as they work.

Re:quick tip (1)

CronoCloud (590650) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990944)

My /boot is 485MB with 83% free, do you think that will be enough, because pre-upgrade failed for the F14 to F15 preupgrade for me.

BTRFS default didn't make it in? (1)

mynis01 (2448882) | more than 2 years ago | (#37987888)

I don't see anything in the release notes, I thought buterfase was supposed to be the default file system in F16?

Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? (1)

allo (1728082) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988030)

it was, but due to a incomplete fsck.btrfs, they decided against it.

Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37988832)

it was, but due to a incomplete fsck.btrfs, they decided against it.

Thank goodness. Right now, btrfs fails miserably under certain workloads. Until it's fixed, you definitely don't want to run VM images off of btrfs, or run apt-get (yum doesn't have the same problem though).

Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? (1)

heson (915298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37988188)

It will be default when more people trust it. Currently not enough do, I have tried it (some time ago) and at that time it was very slow and failed horrible when the laptop ran out of battery. Fedora has a history of making us hate stuff becuase they force it upon us before its ready, yum, networkmanager (still not solid, horrible on anything but a laptop), gnome3 (a joke), pulseaudio (awesome now, was not), biosdevname (horay, the nic can now have _any_ name depending on bios so every script referencing eth0 will now have a long fucking oneliner there, not even a tool to help) Please do not put btrfs in the same situation. Anyone with backup of their data en a spare computer to use while reinstalling can use experimental filesystems if they like.

Re:BTRFS default didn't make it in? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991038)

It's still not stable. I've been trying it periodically since 2008 and my latest tests last month on CentOS 6cr and Fedora 15 yielded kernel panics and corrupted filesystems from just basic stuff like rsyncing data into it until full, or creating and then deleting a few dozen snapshots in a shell loop.

Still not so sure (1)

ossuary (1532467) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989264)

Fed16 smells a bit too Unity-ish for me. The desktop is being further relegated to nothing more than wallpaper and not a productive space (not storage space mind you!). I feel like at this point the Gnome 2 look and feel is gone with the larger distros. The king is dead; long live the king. I am giving Mint a try, but their 12.x plans to produce a hybrid Gnome 2 + 3 environment sounds like a clustersmack waiting to happen. Sigh. I think I miss right-clicking for Properties most of all.

Now with Kermit! (1)

kriston (7886) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989610)

Since Kermit has been embroiled in some rather obscure licensing issues over the years, from the project's name to the open-source license, I was surprised to see ckermit included in Fedora at all. As it turns out, Columbia University shut down the Kermit project earlier this year. Kermit is now really open-source. http://www.kermitproject.org/ [kermitproject.org]

Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 (1)

cswiii (11061) | more than 2 years ago | (#37989862)

If you use nvidia drivers with Fedora -- or at very least, do so with the aid of rpmfusion -- you may want to hold off on upgrading to F16.

To see if you should wait, run the following command:

nvidia-settings -q AccelerateTrapezoids

If you get nothing returned (or more accurately, two CRLFs), you will probably want to hold off on upgrading F15 -> F16. Looks like there is a bug in the nvidia drivers which can cause some pretty severe performance degradation.

Specifically, any card that can't handle trapezoid acceleration will suffer due to this regression. And to put it in perspective, my GT240, which is not ancient doesn't support this. So it's pretty bad.

More details: http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=166698 [nvnews.net]

It /is/ apparently fixed in the 290.06 driver - but that's not in rpmfusion yet.

Re:Important note about nvidia/rpmfusion and F16 (1)

dstyle5 (702493) | more than 2 years ago | (#37990404)

Thanks for the heads up. I have a box with a 8800GT in it that I plan on upgrading so I may have gotten hit by this too. After getting bitten with Fedora 10 not working with my older ATI-based system I no longer upgrade day 1 in order to avoid stuff like this.

Typical \. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37991542)

Bitch Bitch Bitchy Bitch
You don't like it don't use it and STFU
WTF! SOSO........8*)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?