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!

Fedora 19 Released

Soulskill posted 1 year,27 days | from the done-and-done dept.

Linux 202

hypnosec writes "The Fedora Project has officially announced the release of Fedora 19 'Schrödinger's Cat' today. New features for the open source distribution include the developer's assistant, which accelerates development efforts by providing templates, samples and toolchains for a different languages; OpenShift Origin, which allows easy building of Platform-as-a-Service infrastructure; node.js; Ruby 2.0.0; MariaDB; Checkpoint & Restore, which allows users to checkpoint and restore processes; and OpenLMI, which makes remote management of machines simpler. The distribution also packs GNOME 3.8, KDE Plasma Workspace 4.10 and MATE Desktop 1.6."

cancel ×

202 comments

'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (4, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170393)

Damn. Now I'll never know if my system is up or down w/o opening the case.

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (2)

dgatwood (11270) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170457)

They say it was released, but I won't believe it until I see it. And incidentally, does the OS release kill the cat just as well as a particle?

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (2)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170475)

And incidentally, does the OS release kill the cat just as well as a particle?

You're safe as long as you don't run: rpm install "hydrocyanic-acid"

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171977)

Who is still safe after that command, the operator, the cat or the system ?

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170751)

Well, my own cat made it through the release validation process unscathed, but the Project takes no responsibility for the health of anyone else's cats...

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (3, Funny)

ozmanjusri (601766) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171179)

And incidentally, does the OS release kill the cat just as well as a particle?

Well, correlation ain't causation, but I haven't seen any pussy since I started using it.

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44172469)

Have you seen any pussy before you started using it?

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170573)

You missunderstand the concept. With Fedora, it's not "don't know if it's up or down", it's "who gives a flying fuck, it's fedora, not a production system"...

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (2)

purpledinoz (573045) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170633)

Just don't look. It will be up and down at the same time.

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (2)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170711)

Just don't look. It will be up and down at the same time.

Didn't think of that, but it's going to be a bitch for my availability stats.
[ Now I'll have to get a degree in quantum mechanics to re-write "uptime" ... sigh. ]

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (1)

sconeu (64226) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170753)

You sound rather uncertain about that.

Re:'Schrödinger's Cat' ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171011)

Schrödinger's Cat [slashdot.org] in the red Fedora?

Will curiousity kill the cat?

And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170401)

Because the deb package format, and apt is much better than the rubbish that Fedora and RedHat uses...

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170497)

Is this true? One could think that at this point they would have gotten something as basic as a package management (rpm & yum) to work correctly. I have done a couple of basic Fedora installations and the package management has mostly worked fine.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170579)

No it's not true. Obvious troll is obvious.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (3, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170735)

They're both fine. What's more surprising to me is that both of them have completely missed the functionality that puppet, cfengine, et. al. provide.

It used to be that distros would adopt and integrate such functionality. So many of the Fedora 'spins' could simply be expressed as a puppet script. Having a well-supported "make me a mailserver" etc. would be great too.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170813)

In Ubuntu that would be

$ sudo apt-get install mail-server^

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (3, Informative)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171007)

Funnily enough, on Fedora:

yum groupinstall mail-server

Puppet is really for *site-specific* configuration stuff, in my way of looking at things.

And no, Fedora spins could not simply be expressed as puppet scripts, unfortunately. We are considering various proposals for updating how Fedora images are generated (the current system for building live images is pretty hideous behind the scenes), some of which incorporate the use of something like puppet, but something like puppet in itself is not sufficient infrastructure for generating operating system images, it requires rather more bits.

What's missing? (1)

Junta (36770) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171877)

I'm just wondering what is perceived as missing., as producing images from releases has been pretty trivial for me. I use xCAT to deploy them, but I presume cobbler is comparably equipped in this regard. Driver injection and all when I'm producing images for environments requiring out of tree drivers, but that's a pretty rare circumstance while tracking modern distros...

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

srobert (4099) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172391)

Can we mod him up because he used the adverb, "funnily".

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

eric_herm (1231134) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171225)

To be honest, you need more than just a puppet recipe to make a mail server. There is several how to because everybody has a different view on what to use. Dovecot, cyrus, ldap/mysql/simple user, postfix/exim/sendmail, what spam filtering, how, etc, etc. People are asking what module they should use to do this or that, and everybody is replicating module because the current one do not work like they want. So the issue is not solved, it just moved elsewhere.

The live spin are made using kickstart. So someone could already use that to replicate the setup, and there was some proposal to use ansible on the fedora-devel ist, not sure how far this went.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44172019)

Dovecot, cyrus, ldap/mysql/simple user, postfix/exim/sendmail, what spam filtering, how, etc, etc.

In the medium business world the answer is frequently all of the above and then some !!

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172503)

There is several how to because everybody has a different view on what to use

There doesn't need to be a single solution for any of these, but having all the setup be manual doesn't help most users. That's why we went with deb/rpm in the first place.

As far as the choices - all of my clients just tell me "make me a mailserver". They don't choose the specs, they tell me the requirements and I choose the specs. Frankly most people don't care why underlies their tools, for better or worse. Of the hundreds or thousands of packages I use, I can say I've only studied the .specs of dozens of them, so at a certain level apparently I don't care either.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

thetoastman (747937) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171737)

I haven't looked at this yet, but it seems Redhat has their own spin on things:

http://spacewalk.redhat.com/ [redhat.com]

It doesn't look as flexible or powerful as puppet, cfengine, etc., but it looks like a start at least.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1, Flamebait)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170811)

No, it isn't true. Package formats are simple things, indeed. It's really just a tarball with some metadata.

What is still arguably true is that Debian has a wider range of packages than just about any other distro, and Debian also has extremely stringent policies about ensuring upgrade paths and avoiding dependency problems and the like. If you run one of the more stable incarnations of Debian and don't cheat by using external repositories or grabbing packages before they make it through the testing process, you will probably experience fewer packaging problems than on virtually any other distro. But this has nothing at all to do with the package *format*, very little to do with the packaging *tools*, and everything to do with the *package maintenance process*. If Debian used RPM, that would still hold true; if Fedora used .deb, it would still hold true.

Years and years and years ago it was true that RPM-based distros did not have dependency solving package managers with all the capabilities of apt. They do now, and have done for many years. But no community RPM-based distro has packaging policies as robust as the ones applied against the stable branches of Debian (RHEL's are very similar, though, within the same constraints - stick with the official RHEL repos and update channels, no cheating), so they still tend to have a few more cases where a maintainer makes a mistake with a dependency in an update or whatever, and this has led to the eternal life of the 'RPM is inferior to deb' meme, when that's not actually the issue at all.

It would not make sense for a distro like Fedora to be as stringent with packaging policies as stable Debian is, simply because of the differing goals and timeframes involved. But we have been working to make things better, consistently, and the rate of occurrence of packaging errors in modern Fedora is I think significantly lower than it used to be, especially if you don't use the 'updates-testing' repository where updates are validated before being sent to the stable 'updates' repository. (Though we much appreciate it if you *do* enable updates-testing on a testbed machine, and help us to test the updates and catch errors in them before they go to the stable updates repository).

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (3, Informative)

unrtst (777550) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170899)

Personally, I've found yum to be much much slower than apt under normal/default usage.
However, rpm has been MUCH MUCH easier to use than dpkg and it runs quite well. I LOVE the syntax of rpm. I also love apt and its syntax for what it does. If those two could get married, I'd be very happy.

Another one that's pretty darn awesome is emerge. I feel like they got it right almost all around, except that it wasn't made with binary packages in mind, so that part isn't as elegant (IMO).

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (3, Informative)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170985)

The 'real' difference between apt and yum is not as large as it seems, because apt 'cheats' - it has a cron job to download metadata in the background. yum refreshes its metadata only when you run a yum command, so if you don't run them very often, every time you do, you have to wait through a metadata refresh. That's usually what people are complaining about when they complain about yum being slow.

Having said that, even after accounting for that factor, yum's performance could stand improvement, and in fact we're working on that. The package manager currently called 'DNF' is really 'the next major version of yum' being developed in a sort of stealth mode. yum itself is in maintenance-only mode, and all new work is being done on DNF. Once it's mature enough, it will become The New Yum in a future Fedora release. If you're impatient, you can install dnf on Fedora 18 or Fedora 19 and use it instead of yum, with most of the same syntax. It has not yet reached feature parity with yum - including some significant features like 'yum history' - but what it does, it does noticeably faster than yum does it.

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (0, Flamebait)

maden (1855410) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170603)

Thank you for your very lengthy and detailed comparison of Ubuntu and Debian VS Fedora, it has enlightened us in countless ways! I think we can hereby declare Ubuntu and Debian as superior to Fedora, at once. Case closed!

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (3, Insightful)

robmv (855035) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170977)

Give me debdelta and we can talk. Everyone say apt is faster that yum, but until deb based distributions give me the equivalent of deltarpm as an stable feature, yum will always be faster for me on my awful internet connection that apt

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171517)

Eh, apt is so much faster than yum, it doesn't need delta packages!

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (2)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171645)

It speeds up network connections? Where can I get this magical software?!

Re:And it's still not as good as Ubuntu or Debian. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171711)

http://www.debian.org/distrib/

Schrödinger's Cat (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170407)

I'm not going to click the link; I don't want to risk killing it.
I'm better off not knowing.

Re:Schrödinger's Cat (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170421)

Somehow I suspect God already killed that kitten...

LOl (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170439)

Do you still have to suck Poettering's dick to use it?

Who will get it first? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170449)

CentOS or Scientific Linux? Or the dark horse, Oracle Unbreakable Linux?

Re:Who will get it first? (1)

Junta (36770) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171887)

None of the above, since they don't track Fedora before RedHat does?

Testing the character parsing of every web site... (1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170483)

>> Schrödinger's Cat

Thus testing the character parsing and storage of half the blog sites left on the Internet. (With an apostrophe and an umlaut.)

Re:Testing the character parsing of every web site (1)

amorsen (7485) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170651)

More importantly, testing the character parsing and handling of both the installer and multiple other parts of the distribution. Whether it was a good idea to pick a challenging name is probably dependent on the observer.

Re:Testing the character parsing of every web site (2)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170827)

And whether you really really want it to always display correctly on the login screen on VTs...sigh.

Oracle's copy (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170491)

It occurs to me to wonder about Oracle copying Red Hat's work and releasing it as a different distribution. The particular thing I'm wondering about is MariaDB, now part of Fedora, while Oracle is supporting MySQL. Eventually the two projects will go separate ways, and then what will Oracle do?

Re:Oracle's copy (1)

crutchy (1949900) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170701)

MariaDB will lead the way merely because Oracle smells like Schrodinger's cat piss to open source types.
I'm also not sure if Oracle is "supporting" MySQL (milking it may be more the case).

what will Oracle do?

Probably look for some other project to buy off in it's early stages that is set to take over the world.

It still baffles me how Sun Microsystems could simply "buy" GPL licensed MySQL in the first place, but I guess if you own the trademark you own the software.

I wish MariaDB well. I'm yet to convert (I'm still stuck in the old PHP mysql_connect function call mentality), but I will hopefully eventually get with the times.

Re:Oracle's copy (4, Informative)

_merlin (160982) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171631)

It still baffles me how Sun Microsystems could simply "buy" GPL licensed MySQL in the first place, but I guess if you own the trademark you own the software.

Sigh... How many times will this need to be explained? All MySQL code was always Copyright MySQL AB. External contributions to the project required copyright assignment to MySQL AB (just like contributions to GNU projects require copyright assignment to FSF). Sun Microsystems bought the copyright to MySQL, and Oracle bought Sun. The copyright holder can release their IP under any license they want. They cannot revoke the GPL (or other copyleft) license on anything already released under that license. You don't lose your rights to anything MySQL AB and/or Sun Microsystems already released under GPL. But you have no right to demand that the copyright owner release future versions under any particular license.

Re:Oracle's copy (1)

jbolden (176878) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171897)

It still baffles me how Sun Microsystems could simply "buy" GPL licensed MySQL in the first place

MySQL Inc owned the copyright to the MySQL database, every line of code. Their business model was to give away a GPL version and sell a commercial version.
Sun bought MySQL when Oracle began to move towards Linux and break somewhat with Solaris / Sun as their primary system.
Oracle bought Sun and thus owns copyright to the MySQL code.

Re:Oracle's copy (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170881)

Oracle doesn't have a copy of Fedora, so I don't really see how the question is relevant to this thread.

Get it! It's really good. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170495)

Stay away from it! It's really bad

Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (5, Interesting)

Jim Hall (2985) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170519)

I've said it before, and I'll said it again: Fedora's GNOME has really lost me. I've been a longtime Fedora user, and I still like the distro, but I'm giving GNOME a pass in Fedora 19 and going back to Xfce.

Fedora 19 includes GNOME 3.8 as the graphical desktop, and I've previously noted that GNOME 3 has poor usability. [blogspot.com] The GNOME developers have continued this poor usability trend in GNOME 3, which fails to meet two of the four themes of successful usability: Consistency and Menus. Where are the menus? There is no "File" menu that allows me to do operations on files. There is no "Help" menu that I can use when I get stuck. The updated file manager (Nautilus) doesn't have a menu, but other programs in GNOME 3 do (Gedit has menus, and is part of GNOME). Also: when you maximize a Nautilus window, either to the full screen or to half of the screen, the title bar disappears. I don't understand why. The programs do not act consistently.

I will give a positive comment that the updated GNOME file manager now makes it easier to connect to a remote server. This used to be an obvious action under the "File" menu, but in GNOME 3 it is an action directly inside the navigation area. So that's a step in the right direction.

The updated GNOME desktop environment seems to avoid familiar "desktop" conventions, tending towards a "tablet-like" interface. This further removes the obviousness of the new desktop, and it's familiarity.

So it's not really that "Fedora has lost me," but the GNOME desktop. I consider Xfce to have much better usability than GNOME. While I haven't done a formal usability study of Xfce, my heuristic usability evaluation is that Xfce meets all four of the key themes: Familiarity, Consistency, Menus, and Obviousness. The menus are there, and everything is consistent. The default Xfce uses a theme that is familiar to most users, and actions are obvious. Sure, a few areas still need some polish (like the Applications menu, and some icons) but Xfce already seems better than GNOME.

Additionally, if you are technically capable, you can dramatically modify the appearance of Xfce to make it look and act according to your preferences. At home, I've modified my Xfce desktop to something similar to Google's Chromebook (see example [blogspot.com] and instructions [blogspot.com] ). It works really well and I find it is even easier to use than the default Xfce desktop.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170715)

Gnome 3.x is quite good these days, except one needs to install the extension to get sane ALT-TAB behavior.
These days I prefer Gnome 3.x over anything else.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170809)

Gnome 3.x is quite good these days, except one needs to install the extension to get sane ALT-TAB behavior.
These days I prefer Gnome 3.x over anything else.

Ditto, I also install the 'Click Fix' extension that allows you to start a new window by clicking on it in the activity bar instead the default behaviour of bringing the last used window into focus. I also had to fire up tweak tool (or was it dconf-editor?) to enable logging off. It's amazing how much drama some people have managed to conjure up over Gnome 3. Those who don't like it don't have to use it.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170929)

I always thought point of the extension framework was to enhance gnome-shell, rather than replace all the functionality stripped out of it with each incarnation. There is something fundamentally wrong with the UI if you have to load extensions, use a "tweak" tool, or dink with the "dconf" settings just to get your DE back to the level of usefulness it had before the Gnome devs decided they know more than you do on how you should use your computer.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170943)

The fact you are using a desktop environment written by someone else instead of writing your own is a statement that you think someone else knows more than you do on how you should use your computer.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171297)

Incorrect (Are you a Gnome dev? Because this is the sort of shit that's dragging Gnome down).

All it shows is someone else knows how to program better. Not how to use it better as you seem to think.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171457)

He might as well be. He's a Red Hat guy.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171595)

What does that have to do with anything? Red Hat pays several people who work on KDE. I don't work on GNOME, I work on Fedora.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171733)

Does Red Hat hire anyone that isn't an asshole?

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171793)

You're a flack, Adam. You're paid to be here, to market the brand by pushing the 'positives' and spinning the negatives.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171583)

No, I'm not a GNOME dev, just someone who can think straight.

The largest possible set of configuration options for a desktop environment is only possibly accessible by writing one yourself. Imagine a desktop environment with a checkbox for absolutely every possible choice about how a DE could work. What you have just imagined is not KDE (though it's close!), but a very unwieldy programming language.

If you really want 'ultimate choice' you need an option to render the entire desktop upside down, or in inverted colours, or projected onto a sphere, or as if it were a colony of monkeys. All of these are possible configurations of a desktop environment.

When you choose to use someone else's code rather than write your own, you are *inevitably* excluding a very large set of possibilities for how that code could in fact work. The simple act of choosing to use someone else's code is *in itself* a statement that you *want that person to make a large number of choices for you*.

Once that fact is established, then in deciding exactly how many configuration options the resultant code should have we are only bickering about where to draw a line between 'choices made by the author' and 'choices left up to the user'. We are not arguing about some sort of serious principle of personal liberty.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171833)

When you choose to use someone else's code rather than write your own, you are *inevitably* excluding a very large set of possibilities for how that code could in fact work. The simple act of choosing to use someone else's code is *in itself* a statement that you *want that person to make a large number of choices for you*.

Well put. This is precisely why I left Windows for Linux. And also precisely why I don't use the distribution you work on anymore.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171853)

This is good fodder for the comment sections of future Gnome posts. It's going to be fun quoting this material as yet another example of the arrogance that permeates the Gnome developer culture. Personally, I didn't think anyone could do better than WJM in that regard, but I think you've pulled it off. Congrats!

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

dbIII (701233) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172423)

Imagine a desktop environment with a checkbox for absolutely every possible choice about how a DE could work

Now you know why enlightenment 17 took so long!

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172525)

To play Devil's Advocate, choosing a DE makes no statement about the capabilities of the designer. My company chooses to pay me for other work I do that results in profits, and pay Red Hat for the support for DE's. I've been coding a very long time, and if I thought that coding my own DE and supporting it forevermore was the way to go, I would do it.

And while I know you work on Fedora and aren't personally responsible for all RHEL / Fedora issues, you need to understand that some of us are your RHEL / RHEV customers. When we're talking about silly things not working -- such as the System Monitor in Fedora and RHEL not showing all 16 cores (it's way too wide for the screen and can't be made narrower), which should have been vetted in Fedora before shipping in RHEL -- we can become frustrated. We were told by Red Hat that Activity Monitor was broken and they were aware of the issue, and we should use KSysGuard with all its KDE dependencies instead. The point is, sometimes a usable value isn't set as default, and common configurations don't work as expected. That's GNOME 3. The key to using a system is to provide reliable features with little surprise and even less irritation wherever possible. When you're buying expensive licenses you expect the built-in tools to work as expected, barring inevitable bugs. When a bug is brought up through the normal support channels and after an unsatisfactory support response you include your VAR, assigned Red Hat sales staff, as well as Red Hat technical support, you expect real answers.

GUI KVM settings don't save if you use the command-line kvm tools? Well then, don't use the GUI, we were told. It will be fixed soon.

Windows 2008 R2 timing settings result in CPU spikes on Nehalem, while idling, under RHEV 3? *No one* at Red Hat support -- and I had more than 4 reps involved with that one over a couple of months -- could solve it. I solved it and reported the solution so it could be incorporated into a bugfix.

And don't get me started on what we were promised with RHEV 3 vs what was delivered either, or the fact that I was told our problems would be fixed "in a couple months" all the way through October, then told it was ready but there was no upgrade path yet, and finally when there's a semi- sort-of upgrade path, it's too risky to justify. Companies like the one I work for don't like the risk and it was embarrassing to be kept waiting when Red Hat sales said a bugfix was imminent.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170745)

Based on your post, it sounds like Xfce doesn't fit your needs either. Otherwise, why try and make it look and act like a Chromebook?

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

sconeu (64226) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170761)

This release has the foot (they still use a foot, right?) bringing up a screenful of tiled shit that behaves like a touchscreen.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (2)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170877)

Well, File menus frequently don't let you do operations on files either. *Firefox* has a 'File' menu. Which has "Work Offline" and "Quit" on it. How are those actions on Files, exactly?

The reason for the inconsistencies you identify is very simple and I know for a fact it has been explained to you *multiple* times before, so I conclude that you are acting in bad faith by posting as if you had no idea about it, but for the sake of the rest of the audience, I'll explain it again: the GNOME applications are in the process of being revised to meet new design guidelines. This process is not complete yet; until it is, you'll see inconsistencies between apps which have been fully converted, apps which have not yet been fully converted, and apps which haven't been converted at all.

See https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/HIG/ApplicationMenus [gnome.org] for the guidelines on using application menus (the menu in the top panel).

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (2)

Jim Hall (2985) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171093)

The reason for the inconsistencies you identify is very simple and I know for a fact it has been explained to you *multiple* times before, so I conclude that you are acting in bad faith by posting as if you had no idea about it

No, but I can only comment on the state of things today.

[...] for the sake of the rest of the audience, I'll explain it again: the GNOME applications are in the process of being revised to meet new design guidelines. This process is not complete yet; until it is, you'll see inconsistencies between apps which have been fully converted, apps which have not yet been fully converted, and apps which haven't been converted at all.

(emphasis mine)

And I look forward to trying GNOME again when things are more consistent between all the applications. Until then, I consider Xfce to have much better usability than GNOME.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (3, Informative)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171321)

"I don't understand why. The programs do not act consistently."

(emphasis mine)

You implied very clearly that you did not know why this was the case, and that it was some kind of intentional thing. You *do* know why it's the case, because it has previously been explained to you, and you know that it is not the intended state of affairs but merely an artifact of a long-term transition in design, yet you continue to criticize it as if it were the former rather than the latter.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171103)

yum install gnome-classic-session

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (4, Informative)

RedHackTea (2779623) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171205)

Actually, Nautilus and the other GNOME applications listed do have a menu. At the top bar in the left corner next to the "Activities" is a little image of the currently focused application. If you right click on it, it brings up the normal menu that you're used to. It's not very intuitive at first... After using Fedora 19 (Beta) for the past few weeks now, I can tell you that GNOME 3.8 has fixed most (if not all) of the stability issues that I used to encounter in Fedora 18. It runs smoother and faster for me. However, the dreaded "tracker" program and the initial installer are still bitches. Fedora fixed the Add and Update Software applications, but now GNOME has broken the Printer application (if use it on a LAN, it will present you with an authorization popup repeatedly for every computer). But internally, I am happier with hostnamectl and SELinux now; Fedora has appeared to fix some of the annoying issues in Fedora 18 at least. Lastly, I suggest LXDE over Xfce :D

Re: Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171715)

Check out MATE 1.6 in Fedora 19. It is effectively a fork of gnome 2. It may be very traditional and old fashioned but it sure is functional. Even still works well with compiz.

Cinnamon (Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce) (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44172003)

I moved to Cinnamon desktop and all my complaints about gnome3 are gone. I love it. I also did a FesUp upgrade to Fedora 19 in the morning and I like it better. Finally gnome-online-accounts (useless for me) is not getting in the way of evolution

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

dbIII (701233) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172415)

and I've previously noted that GNOME 3 has poor usability

While you and I may think gnome 3 sucks dogs balls some of the people using it are noting how happy their dog is :)

The common desktop idea didn't catch on because some people are more productive with what others think is weird (eg. xmonad) or just like something that others view with revulsion on sight (Win8 Metro).

Personally I like MATE better, but don't use it since it does weird stuff with VLC (can't see the drop down menus). I'd heard enlightenment 17 was going to be a standard package in fedora19, but if not the pre-2000 version e16 with a decade worth of bug fixes is still better than a lot of desktop environments.

Re:Moving to Fedora 19 Xfce (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | 1 year,27 days | (#44172433)

I second your views on Xfce. I can put someone in front of it and they don't need UI training. Things just work as expected.

Your Welcome (2)

schrodingersGato (2602023) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170537)

I approve of the code name of this release

Re:Your Welcome (3, Funny)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170649)

I twitch at the subject line of your post.

Your a faggot (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170663)

I disapprove of your post.

Re:Your Welcome (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171129)

I'm a Spherical Cow man, all the way...

Unstable X crashed my laptop reinstalled Fedora 17 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170671)

What the title said, but with much swearing and cursing added here in the comments F17 reinstall related.

Sticking with F18 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170769)

Hi,

I won't get into the Fedora vs Distribution X discussion.
Has anybody here tested the latest Fedora release? Can you recommend it on a daily machine (some office, some basic programming, browsing, listening to music)?
I am not sure if I should go with it or stick with Fedora 18 until Fedora 20 comes out...

Thanks.

Re:Sticking with F18 (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44170955)

If you're doing basic stuff, F18 is working for you, and you don't see any shiny features in the newer version of whatever desktop you use that you really want, there's no pressing reason to upgrade, but you would probably be fine if you did upgrade. For my work, F19 works fine, so did F18, so would any other distro, really.

Re:Sticking with F18 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171235)

You don't know what your talking about.

Or you never do any serious work on your machine.

Re:Sticking with F18 (2)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171305)

I do love being told I don't know anything by ACs.

Re:Sticking with F18 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171383)

I love the self-righteous sarcasm of a Red Hat PR flack.

Re:Sticking with F18 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171435)

Sorry, I meant to say " Fedora QA Community Monkey".

Re:Sticking with F18 (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171019)

Fedora has never been an end-user distro. It always been targeted for the tester, the bleeding-edge power user, the tweakers and tinkerers. As an use everyday OS with a minimum of hassle, you'd be better off using Debian stable, or even Ubuntu or its derivatives, or OpenSuse etc. Fedora is for testing the next tech going into Red Hat's next version of RHEL. It always has been no matter what Red Hat acolytes say.

Re:Sticking with F18 (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171307)

"Fedora is for testing the next tech going into Red Hat's next version of RHEL. It always has been no matter what Red Hat acolytes say."

if this were true, Fedora would not have something like 5x as many packages as RHEL does.

Re:Sticking with F18 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171549)

Yes, it would still be true. In the same way that Debian Unstable has more packages than Debian Stable (packages that don't meet criteria for Stable are dropped).

And what exactly is wrong with admitting that Fedora is a testing ground for EL, when it clearly is? Anyone worth their salt already knows the truth.

Re:Sticking with F18 (1)

Junta (36770) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171919)

Yes it would. That's part of the test. Gauging relative interest in packages is part of the whole situation. Sure, enthusiasts get to come along for the ride and the developers get to try out things they would otherwise be forbidden from trying that they *want* to do, but the core mission of Fedora is, effectively, a proving ground.

It's the nature of the beast. Ubuntu is the same way, there is an ulterior motive at play. It's the simple truth of commercial linux. The question is to what degree the ulterior motives conflict, do nothing, or align with user goals. Fedora delivers cutting edge function first which causes some consternation as it fails, but for a respectable sized audience, that is a fine price of admission for experiencing new things first and, in some cases, getting to shape how immature technologies ripen.

No codecs, ugly fonts (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44170873)

Why would I want that. Another distribution that need to be fixed before passing basic usability test. It's either you become a M$ or Apple whore and sell your personal life or spends days tweaking your Linux distro. And if this is not enough as soon as you get comfortable with one, it becomes obsolete.

Re:No codecs, ugly fonts (1)

Psychotria (953670) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171767)

Fonts on Linux these days look better than Windows 7 (in my opinion) and on par or better than OSX. If you want to tweak to your hearts content (or just set an aesthetically pleasing default) then use Infinality [infinality.net] .

Re:No codecs, ugly fonts (1)

Junta (36770) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171937)

Add rpm-fusion and livna and you have everything you may want on the codec front.

I agree that Fedora could make this easier, but it isn't too onerous as it stands, install two rpms and things get in order.

I like Gnome 3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171083)

Am I the only person in the world that thinks Gnome 3 is actually pretty cool? Once I stopped bellyaching about being forced to do things a different way I actually started getting things done faster and with less mucking about. It still beats out the 'Metro' interface if you ask me and it seems like they are getting ready for touch which seems reasonable at this point in the road.

Re:I like Gnome 3 (1)

AdamWill (604569) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171295)

No, lots of people do. Just the ones who don't are loud and annoying.

Re:I like Gnome 3 (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171817)

No, lots of people do. Just the ones who don't are loud and annoying.

I get the impression you're involved with either Fedora or GNOME development. That's cool; I don't care for either project (I'm primarily a Debian/KDE user), but they still have a place, and it's good that you're involved in something you like. Still, when one is very close to the creation of something, one tends to have trouble being impartial, and you're showing that here.

You should probably take a deep breath, put down the keyboard, and go take a walk or something. You've spent over an hour in this discussion telling everybody how they're 'wrong' for having opinions you disagree with or for not having nice things to say about your pet project, and now you're starting down the path of insulting people for having different opinions. That's not a good way to represent a project, no matter how passionately you may disagree. All you're doing is giving FOSS haters more ammunition, so they can go "see, look how those freetards act! Look how unprofessional they are!"

The best thing you could have done was stay hands-off and not post anything, or maybe one post somewhere in here to provide a counter-example to the nay-sayers. Instead, you've chosen to single-handedly make a bad impression with many of the people reading these comments. At best, you're making people think ill of you personally, and at worst, you're making them bitter about Fedora or GNOME, because you're representing them by being combative, and people will think of that when they think about the projects.

FWIW, I'm not writing this in response to anything specific said, or any particular comment made; this has been my only post and I have no real investment in the overall topic beyond hating seeing open source misrepresented by someone with misplaced good intentions.

Anyway, good luck and try to relax.

Re:I like Gnome 3 (1)

RedHackTea (2779623) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171327)

Agreed; it grew on me as well. When it was first released, I was actually excited for something trying to be different than Windows and Mac OS X -- much like with tiling window managers and E17. But, the people at Fedora don't live in a box, they provide many different ISOs with different default DEs, and they provide easy groups/collections to install different DEs using yum. I have GNOME and LXDE installed and don't have a problem. If I need blazing speed, I log in using the LXDE session, else I use GNOME.

Re:I like Gnome 3 (1)

Junta (36770) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171947)

I really miss window title search, and show only one application from my compiz/kde experiences. This is after a lot of extensions which I think is a pretty atrocious replacement for simple configurabilty, but it isn't hopeless... the 'activities view' concept seems good and, most critically the alt-tab makes larger window counts actually manageable.

oh goody (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171089)

I wonder what they've irrevocably broken this time.

captcha: depress

says it all, doesn't it.

My favorite feature in Fedora (1)

ikhider (2837593) | 1 year,27 days | (#44171215)

Are the install errors! Nobody is chock full 'o install errors like Fedora! Error 17, error 19, error 20! Each install attempt is like an easter egg hunt! Makes installing Gentoo a sunday afternoon stroll in the park by comparison! SE Linux is also a favorite! A security feature brought to you by the NSA, because they really care!

Tablet UI from "New Generation" of programmers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,27 days | (#44171219)

Do the "New Generation" of programmers, Have no fucking clue?

These idiots that have taken for granted the existing stable conventions, One's they cut their teeth on.
And now thinking they know better - By going down this Tablet interface path - With everyone along with it?

HEAR IS A CLUE FOR ALL THE GNOME DEVELOPERS - AND DISTRO'S LIKE UBUNTU.

FUCKING SPLIT THE PARIGAM, FUCKING OBVIOUS ISN'T IT?

PEOPLE WANT THIS:

1. Servers. (No change here)

2. Desktops - Stable. (We really wan't DESKTOP's in their traditional sense. We don't want hybrid touch screen desktops or tablet interfaces.
                                          Desktops are where hard and complicated work is done. Multi Screen - ie. Multi reference info while you work etc.)

2.5. Desktops - Yuppy. There will be some that want BLING on their desktop, So as long as the Tablet UI can be installed on a desktop
                                          AS an OPTION then this will keep those happy too. Key word here is OPTION. It's not the default for a "Desktop".

3. Tablets/Phones. (Here you can do all your fancy new interfaces. Here people CONSUME. Doen't matter if your new fancy
                                          UI makes things too simple - It's not a PRODUCTION critical platform. As long a people can WORK with it.)

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...