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 21 Linux Will Be Nameless

samzenpus posted about 6 months ago | from the john-doe dept.

Linux Business 128

darthcamaro writes "What follows in the footsteps of Heisenbug, Spherical Cow and Beefy Miracle? Apparently the answer is 'null' as is nothing. Fedora Linux 21 could well have no funky new name as its past predecessors have all had, thanks to a recent vote by the Fedora board to move away from the existing naming practices. Fedora 21 itself will not be out in the first half of 2014 either, instead the plan is now for a release sometime around August. A delayed release however doesn't mean something is wrong as Red Hat's community Linux distro aims to re-invent itself."

cancel ×

128 comments

Good! (4, Insightful)

inflamed (1156277) | about 6 months ago | (#45945337)

The use of both naming and version numbers to differentiate distribution versions makes searching for bug workarounds harder.

Re:Good! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945493)

Now I don't have to see ASCII garbage in my bootloader because they use Unicode for Schrodinger's umlaut.

Re:Good! (5, Funny)

sconeu (64226) | about 6 months ago | (#45945905)

Is Schroedinger's Umlaut there or not there until you look at /etc/issue?

Re:Good! (1)

EkriirkE (1075937) | about 6 months ago | (#45946195)

I see a jumble of improperly decoded UTF-8 in grub2 despite defining that as my charset

Re:Good! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946787)

Then you should use names. Google is terrible at finding something by version number. For some reason it often seems to think any number is a sufficient hit.

Re:Good! (2)

vlueboy (1799360) | about 6 months ago | (#45948085)

Then you should use names. Google is terrible at finding something by version number. For some reason it often seems to think any number is a sufficient hit.

Agreed. This is a problem with firefox version searches too. I preferred version numbers back 6 years ago when google didn't ignore your search queries and quotes.

Up until recently, if you looked for something like firefox 28 and get something like 3.5.28. What on earth? It seems to be better, as I can't replicate. Yahoo is still affected [yahoo.com]

Spherical Cow (1, Funny)

mythosaz (572040) | about 6 months ago | (#45945349)

...but it only works for a spherical cow in a vacuum, uniformly radiating milk in all directions.

I'd suggest naming it as '\0' (2)

tomer (313505) | about 6 months ago | (#45945353)

Let's see who doesn't filter this character, so it may break some systems.

Re:I'd suggest naming it as '\0' (2)

The MAZZTer (911996) | about 6 months ago | (#45945377)

Re:I'd suggest naming it as '\0' (1)

tomer (313505) | about 6 months ago | (#45945789)

Because we should keep the SQL injection for the next release, and XSS to the one after.

Re:I'd suggest naming it as '\0' (2)

goombah99 (560566) | about 6 months ago | (#45945697)

I would suggest "chrome dome" as in the absence of a Fedora.

Re:I'd suggest naming it as '\0' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946479)

i vote for able archer myself.

Like Prince (1)

goombah99 (560566) | about 6 months ago | (#45945959)

Just make the name some useless symbol like Prince did. Or make it something that no magazine will print.

Re:Like Prince (2)

tepples (727027) | about 6 months ago | (#45946857)

Or make it something that no magazine will print.

You mean like Ubuntu 8.04 Hairy Hardon?

Obvious (5, Funny)

tempest69 (572798) | about 6 months ago | (#45945359)

Fedora 21 (Black Jack)
I'm calling it that, and I dont care if Fedora leaves it nameless.

Re:Obvious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945555)

Racist fuck.

Re:Obvious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945803)

That's when your mom goes cruising for big black cock uptown, right?

Jack Black (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 6 months ago | (#45945587)

The distro that doesn't need YOU to tell it how to rock.

Re:Jack Black (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945717)

The distro that doesn't need YOU to tell it how to rock.

Of course not! After all, it will be FREE, free, legal and 21.

Re:Jack Black (0)

QRDeNameland (873957) | about 6 months ago | (#45945933)

What's the name of this distro? I don't know, but it's built like the shit, and it's good to go.

Re:Jack Black (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946069)

Do you want to make it any more blatant that you take dicks up the ass?

Re:Obvious (2)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 6 months ago | (#45945719)

Fedora 21 (Black Jack)
I'm calling it that, and I dont care if Fedora leaves it nameless.

Don't hold back, make your own distro.
With blackjack and hookers.

Re:Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946501)

in fact, forget about the distro and the blackjack. ah, screw the whole thing.

Re:Obvious (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946543)

with a Beowulf cluster of hookers!

Re:Obvious (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 6 months ago | (#45947517)

I'm calling it that, and I dont care if Fedora leaves it nameless.

A company that gives up naming its products is like a parent who gives up naming their children...

Re:Obvious (1)

Megane (129182) | about 6 months ago | (#45947779)

Fedora 21: Old Enough to Drink!

Bender? (1)

antdude (79039) | about 6 months ago | (#45948647)

Is that you? ;)

Naming releases (3, Insightful)

similar_name (1164087) | about 6 months ago | (#45945361)

I used to not care for naming releases. Just give me version numbers. However, I've changed my mind. Now I find it more fruitful to search for issues with a particular version by name rather than by number.

Re:Naming releases (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945473)

However, I've changed my mind. Now I find it more fruitful to search for issues with a particular version by name rather than by number

Yes, but what do you do if you need to figure out the software requirements?
Quick, does "at least mountain lion" include "leopard"? How about "at least Cheetah version, but no later than Crouching Striped Tiger"?

Re:Naming releases (2)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about 6 months ago | (#45946017)

However, I've changed my mind. Now I find it more fruitful to search for issues with a particular version by name rather than by number

Yes, but what do you do if you need to figure out the software requirements?
Quick, does "at least mountain lion" include "leopard"? How about "at least Cheetah version, but no later than Crouching Striped Tiger"?

Crouching Striped Tiger? What about the Hidden Polka Dot Dragon?

Re:Naming releases (2)

armanox (826486) | about 6 months ago | (#45946025)

Which is why having both are useful.

Re:Naming releases (1)

similar_name (1164087) | about 6 months ago | (#45946199)

I didn't mean to imply that I wanted names to the exclusion of numbers. I still like version numbers. Although names like Gingerbread, Honeycomb, Ice Cream and Jelly Bean aren't hard to figure out. Silly names aside, some of the others follow a similar convention.

Re:Naming releases (1)

vlueboy (1799360) | about 6 months ago | (#45948117)

Number searches have gotten crappy, like I said in my other comment.
Name searches are meant to be newbie-friendly. Random non-geek trying out Ubuntu X doesn't know how to pull up the version number, but can memorize the funny name and find forum support on google

For those of us who are affixed to Linux year after year the names can become a pain if we've skipped a few versions. And seeing how much hoarding we do with machines we've re-purposed, keeping track of it all is a pain.

It's still horrible for Android troubleshooting, because only geeks know the names, or the version numbers. It's kind of a black box. I like that iOS is fond of a number that reliably goes up yearly, but that's about all.

Fedora 21 Linux will be useless (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945387)

FTFY subby.

Something is wrong. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945393)

There's always something wrong. Somewhere.

If there isn't, then it's really strange.

Why does teh windowwwz have teh name? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945413)

Linuxes only has da number. One version Linsux!!!! one version linsux!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
FUCK WINDOZER!!!! I'm an ecspurt on everythang!!!!
 
cuntintraining

Re:Why does teh windowwwz have teh name? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946205)

Ladies and gentlemen... there is actually a human being on this planet who composed this post in his head, typed it on his keyboard, and thought that sharing it with the world was a good idea. Let that rattle around in your heads for a while. I present to you Desperation.

Re:Why does teh windowwwz have teh name? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946825)

hey cuntintraining, dat you? another one of your phantom accounts to mod up such bullshit? lolzzzz!!!

Re:Why does teh windowwwz have teh name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45948025)

yes it is me. want to see my picture to be sure?:
https://badoo.com/girlintraining/photos/ [badoo.com]

Hey, how about the "New Fedora"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945501)

Nah, only some total marketing d------s would name it something like that.

Longer cycles and tick/tock please (4, Informative)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 6 months ago | (#45945525)

I gave up on Fedora after 14. It is too much of a bleeding edge perpetual beta and moving target. Please make it a one year new feature release with a 6 month stabilization release. I realize RHEL is the production distribution, and the derivative CentOS 6.x is my favorite distribution by far. A testing distribution like Fedora won't get as wide of testing if it is as unstable as it was when I gave up.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945691)

Figured I'd reply, as I'd have to agree about fedora 14. For what ever reason, that was kind of a crappy release. But, 15 was better. Everything since has been much better. Don't really have any stats/ articles to point out, but hat was my experience with the two systems I run fedora on. Your mileage may vary.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (2)

TuxThePenguin2205 (1031140) | about 6 months ago | (#45945745)

Fedora 20 is excellent out of the (metaphorical) box. I'm going to move my dad across to it from Mint next time I do an update. (It has become difficult to build a git version of wine since Ubuntu made some upstream changes to multilib)

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (1)

pseudofrog (570061) | about 6 months ago | (#45945961)

Half the time I try Fedora, yum introduces something that keeps it from booting. No other distro breaks in such a spectacular way for me.

Hopefully, this new development model with introduce just a bit more stability. With Red Hat behind it, Fedora should be a premier distribution I can recommend to others. In the meantime, I'll stick with recommending Ubuntu, Mint, and openSUSE to those who don't mind doing some repo configuration for non-free stuff.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946227)

I gave up on Fedora after 14. It is too much of a bleeding edge perpetual beta and moving target. Please make it a one year new feature release with a 6 month stabilization release. I realize RHEL is the production distribution, and the derivative CentOS 6.x is my favorite distribution by far. A testing distribution like Fedora won't get as wide of testing if it is as unstable as it was when I gave up.

Tell me something when you've used a Fedora release within the last three years. Until then, you're just complaining about ancient history.

Six releases of Windows ago, things were pretty hard

Six releases of Macintosh ago, things were pretty hard

Don't even attempt to tell me that things are pretty hard right now with Fedora, you have self-admitted that you don't know it. I've been using Fedora from RedHat 6.2 through Fedora 1 till today. It's not that hard, and apart from two pretty spectacular messes that were rather easy to mitigate, it's never been too bleeding edge to keep running unless you want to break it.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946343)

Hell yeah, 6.2 baybay! That was when I jumped over from slackware.

Still happy. Of course, I'm also still on F16.

yum had problems at first. It was not an instant success. But it has been years since I've had problems that weren't directly related to 3rd party rpm repos. And it manages my mixed 32/64bit build environments perfectly.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (2)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946611)

I'm still on 16, and I've been using it since it was "RedHat Linux." I'm not convinced it is some sort of "testing" distro. It is actually mostly a developers distro, that also works really well on servers. It has to have newer stuff because developers need a tool chain that can run the latest versions. It also can't be too bleeding edge, because the servers need stable versions. A lot of the stuff on fedora is many versions in the past, for these reasons. Other stuff is nearly in the future. The big changes, like going from SysV init to systemd, were carefully thought out over a period of years, and they finally changed at a time when a lot of distros are changing. Most of the others chose stuff that is new and has serious known problems, but systemd has been around for years and has proven itself both in practice, and in its architecture. Were there bugs in the transition? Yes. Of course.

You can always choose the version before the current one, and get a polished distro because of the updates.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45948105)

Just About Any release of Linux is better than Fedora - it used to be clean, flexible, and easy to implement - now "Do It Our Way or Piss Off" seems to be their motto - I will never use or recommend it again - a real piece of shit.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (1)

dbIII (701233) | about 6 months ago | (#45948285)

It is too much of a bleeding edge perpetual beta and moving target

That is kind of the point.

Re:Longer cycles and tick/tock please (1)

guacamole (24270) | about 6 months ago | (#45948653)

That's why there is Fedora. When I used to be a sysadmin, I run CentOS on all Linux servers and desktops at work while using Fedora on a personal desktop at home. Fedora is a too fast of a moving target for production environments, but it's nice OS for enthusiasts looking for an OS that gets an annual update that includes all the bleeding edge software.

Nameless but will it run on iPhone 6? (0)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 6 months ago | (#45945675)

Just asking.

Now if Debian... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945679)

would only do this! Their secret name version mapping is ridiculous. There's nothing on the main page that maps the names to the versions, and people that ask for help with it on the mailing lists are treated horrifically.

Re:Now if Debian... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945775)

> treated horrifically.

I think banned is the word you're looking for. Those Debian people become as irrational as xtians at that point. I know Pixar was important to Debian at one point, but calling people names and attacking them and their families personally because they don't know which Toy Story character goes with each release is just ridiculous. We get that you're Toy Story fans, but please stop attacking and banning us for not memorizing characters and lines from the movie. Debian is a great distribution, but the irrational fans of the children's cartoon have just ruined the distribution for everyone else. Again, please stop acting like xtians.

Re:Now if Debian... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945837)

Because doing a Google search is really hard, amirite? Concern troll is concerned.

Re:Now if Debian... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945935)

secret name version mapping

I once saw a page on debian.org that had the mapping. It's gone now, but you can't say it's a secret. It's only undocumented. I don't get why the Debian people try so hard to keep that information from leaking out then get so angry and lash out at people that don't know the version to obscure name mapping, but they do it. I guess their bazaar isn't cathedral enough so they feel the need to act more like Catholics with their little secrets. It's pretty damn petty and turns-off normal people. Debian will never grow as long as that attitude continues. Seriously, I hate getting my head bitten off on the mailing list for asking what version Squeeze was. I probably got two dozen pieces of hate mail for that. There are a lot of parallels between the Debian people and Christians.

Re:Now if Debian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946697)

Debian 7 is squeeze....

Re:Now if Debian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45947153)

no 6 was squeeze, 7 is wheezy

Re:Now if Debian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45947773)

no 6 was squeeze, 7 is wheezy

LOL, you just proved the OP's point that it is pretty damn hateful the way Debian hides the version to name conversion. I just looked at debian.org, and I couldn't find any sort of page that defines the conversion. Nothing on the main page defines it, and I clicked through several pages and none of them defined it. I don't get the point in keeping that information hidden.

Re:Now if Debian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45948091)

Release Info [debian.org] link on the main page

Re:Now if Debian... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946585)

Now if Debian would only do this! Their secret name version mapping is ridiculous. There's nothing on the main page that maps the names to the versions, and people that ask for help with it on the mailing lists are treated horrifically.

Probably because it's extremely easy to find. Quoting debian.org, including links:

The latest stable release of Debian [debian.org] is 7.3. The last update to this release was made on December 14th, 2013. Read more about available versions of Debian [debian.org] .

It's the third sentence on the page, standing alone, very easy to find. The second link in that sentence, which offers to tell you more about available versions of Debian, has the following:

Index of releases

        The next release of Debian is codenamed "jessie" — no release date has been set
        Debian 7.0 ("wheezy") — current stable release
        Debian 6.0 ("squeeze") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 5.0 ("lenny") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 4.0 ("etch") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 3.1 ("sarge") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 ("woody") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 ("potato") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 ("slink") — obsolete stable release
        Debian GNU/Linux 2.0 ("hamm") — obsolete stable release

Numbers with corresponding code names. Anybody cluttering the mailing lists with complaints or questions about that deserve to be slapped with a "STFU and RTFM", considering it's one bloody click away from the main page and plainly presented.

The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks) (3, Insightful)

John Allsup (987) | about 6 months ago | (#45945703)

When searching for information relavent to a release, say Debian 7, putting 'debian 7' into Google is useless, since Google can't infer the meaning of a number 7 in a document.  Searching for 'debian wheezy', however, is far more specific, since 'wheezy' isn't used where the number 7 might be (for example 'bug with proglet 7 on debian 3' might match pages talking about bugs with proglet running on debian 7 where the error code is 3).  If they don't have a codename, at least attach a unique memorable short string to each release so that it can be easily searched for.

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (3, Informative)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 6 months ago | (#45945747)

Except that Google can infer from context that your search is related to Debian 7 [google.com] and not Debian 6 [google.com] or Debian 8 [google.com] .

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (3, Informative)

TuxThePenguin2205 (1031140) | about 6 months ago | (#45945765)

though putting "debian 7" (including the quotes) gets much better answers ;-)

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945835)

yeah, because when I search how to [insert task here] on windows 8 i get tons of results that apply only to vista and 98

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946033)

You do realize that the font you're using makes your text almost unreadable?

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946173)

Can't you see his low UID?! He's submitting his comments via telegraph, you insensitive clod!

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946819)

Your are correct in saying that Google is useless. Try searching for '"channel seven" thompson janovicz' then, after looking at the first hit, try searching for '"channel seven" thompson +janovicz' (just the addition of a plus sign). Second search produces zero results even though the first result contains a full match in first entry.

Re:The problem with only numbers (uniqueness rocks (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946889)

Typo correction: above "janovicz" ==> "janowicz"

Enough with the stupid names! (4, Insightful)

RuffMasterD (3398975) | about 6 months ago | (#45945751)

Thank you Fedora, for dropping the stupid names already. Code name my distro Humping Hippo for all I care, but don't put it into the final product. I shouldn't have to search the Internet every time I need to translate between release number and codename. Sure, I can run 'lsb_release -r' or whatever command on my own system, but what about every other system out there? Ubuntu, your move...

Re:Enough with the stupid names! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45947907)

With the recent clever introduction of syntactically significant punctuation and on-7-bit ASCII in the distribution name, perhaps we could do what Prince did? Invent a special font just for the distribution name.

Perhaps "!ing Hippo"?

Might as well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945815)

After that sham contest that ended with naming f17 Beefy Miracle I couldn't care less what they name it.
Insiders who put the fix in to get what they wanted?
Yeah, that's Open, and in the spirit of the community. What a farce.
Hypocrites!

Nothing to see here. (5, Funny)

Max Threshold (540114) | about 6 months ago | (#45945873)

They "reinvent" themselves every few years... basically whenever they start attracting too many users.

Re:Nothing to see here. (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946639)

Good, drive the unwashed masses back! Their features requests dumb down my user experience.

Ah, the Distro Not to be Named (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945957)

The people that bring us all those monstrosities like systemd and pol(icy)?kit have shown their true colors. This is the distribution that is so evil that we must never utter its true name.

Re:Ah, the Distro Not to be Named (2)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946681)

If you want to know why hardcore fedora users have been asking for the switch to systemd for many years, here it is:

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html [0pointer.de]

A lot of people who were otherwise in the "stick with SysV" crowd fall in love with systemd as soon as they learn the details. It is truly a step forwards over 80s UNIX.

Re:Ah, the Distro Not to be Named (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | about 6 months ago | (#45947921)

I'm afraid it's a step forward to dotcom project planning. De-scripting the init process has made it unpredictable, especially if specific components are delayed, such as network component recognition. There are advantages for running daemon: systemd has been fragile. But since Dan Bernstein finally released "daemontools" as public domain, they could have used that, which has a much better serial behavior at boot time and manages dependencies more consistently.

What is happening? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45945989)

Is anybody here familiar with the devs? I'd like to know what's going on. Delaying a release, couldn't bother choosing a name... seems a bad omen.

I'd hate it if Fedora were to die. It is the only viable alternative to Ubuntu.

What will be the codename in lsb_release (1)

rminsk (831757) | about 6 months ago | (#45946013)

One of the things in the Linux Standard Base is codename. What will "lsb_release" -c return?

Re:What will be the codename in lsb_release (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946645)

What will "lsb_release" -c return?

Archlinux doesn't use codenames and lsb_release still manages reasonable output:
$ lsb_release -a
LSB Version: 1.4
Distributor ID: Arch
Description: Arch Linux
Release: rolling
Codename: n/a

Re:What will be the codename in lsb_release (1)

Aighearach (97333) | about 6 months ago | (#45946687)

"null"

no name? (3, Funny)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about 6 months ago | (#45946063)

so i guess we have to call it The Release Formerly Known As Fedora 21.

Re:no name? (1)

MurukeshM (1901690) | about 6 months ago | (#45946417)

so i guess we have to call it The Release Currently Known As Fedora 21.

FTFY. Kneel before the Prince.

Re:no name? (1)

Evil Pete (73279) | about 6 months ago | (#45947691)

The distro that can be named by Man

Is not the Fedora 21 distro.

-- with apologies to Lao Tzu.

Simple enough (2)

quantaman (517394) | about 6 months ago | (#45946125)

It will simply be the distro with no name [imdb.com]

Re:Simple enough (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about 6 months ago | (#45946335)

Then 22 should be called A Fistful of Fedoras.

Re:Simple enough (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 6 months ago | (#45946401)

Oh I wish I could mod that up :)

Re:Simple enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946791)

23 For a Few Fedoras More

Re:Simple enough (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 6 months ago | (#45947421)

24 The Source, the Docs, and the Sound System.

The pendulum (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946263)

We've seen the pendulum swing one way (Windows 3.1, 95, 98, 2000) and then back the other way (Millenium XP Vista)

My guess is your best bet is to fire all the marketing people

Codename: Nattering <NullPointerException> (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946311)

Something tells me this is an elaborate troll by RedHat, reminding everyone the hard way to null-check their inputs.

Is it really going to be just Fedora 21? (1)

Ruedii (2712279) | about 6 months ago | (#45946587)

Is it really going to be just Fedora 21?

I sort of like the name Null Nadda!

Fedora Name (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45946689)

I like cute animal names like Ubuntu. I suggest Micturating Monkey.

Cheerful Charlie

Finally (3, Funny)

hduff (570443) | about 6 months ago | (#45947669)

RedHat admits that it cannot come up with dumber names than Canonical.

Another Paradigm Shift? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45947865)

After the demonstrable trade-off of "oooh, shiny!" features versus anything resembling traceability, supportability, or compatiblity demonstrated by:

                      1) NetworkManager
                      2) SeLinux
                      3) udev
                      4) Gnome3
                      5) systemd
                      6) the new installer
                      7) Replacing /bin with a symlink to /usr/bin
                      8) Putting punctation in the operating system name

I hope the Fedora team has learned an invaluable lesson: leave the shiny stuff *optional*, not default and embedded in random cruft all over your enviornment

Good choice of name(less)! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45948401)

So
17 Beefy Miracle
18 Spherical Cow
19 Schroedinger's Cat
20 Heisenbug
21 Nameless

Good riddance (1)

guacamole (24270) | about 6 months ago | (#45948669)

When you have a dozen releases of OS within a decade, no one is going to remember the individual names anyways.

I wonder how the bootloader will cope with that (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 6 months ago | (#45948779)

I still have a bootloader menu entry for Fedora 19 called "Schr?dinger?s cat" since nobody bothered to check if it could cope with umlauts or apostrophes. I wonder if Fedora 21 will feature a blank menu entry.

re-invent what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45949085)

It's just a wrap-up of Linux, a cover. Distros themselves are nothing but integration of existing softwares on Linux - softwares made by others and have nothing to do with Red Hat. It cannot invent anything except the package management system, unless they want to learn Ubuntu and adopt some weird and unusable UI - even such is only the desktop but have zero influence on what productive apps people use everyday.

The whole business of commercial distro is a joke, if not worse.

thank you (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45949165)

Ubuntu and others should do that, too.

I don't know how often i had to look on wikipedia to translate the utterly useless name to a version number and vice versa.

Anaconda needs love... (1)

rklrkl (554527) | about 6 months ago | (#45949243)

I don't know about you, but I really don't like the redesigned Fedora installer (Anaconda) that's turned up in recent Fedora releases. It's quite SHOUTY (yes, headings in full capitals and bold too!) and the disk partitioning section is frankly awful (very non-obvious, mixed units and it took me ages to work out how to create a partition that used all the remaining space - answer: put a huge value for the size and it'll round it down to what's left).

Fedora with the MATE desktop isn't too bad, but sadly that's the not the desktop that's the default selection. I also seem to remember a couple of releases (18 and 19 I think) that were incredibly show to both show the login screen and the post-login desktop in VirtualBox (20-25 secs for each on an i7 machine with a couple of CPU cores allocated!), though it looks like Fedora 20 fixed this. Many people will install Fedora in a VM first (particularly if they're Windows users) and if it performs poorly there, it won't get installed on the bare metal.

I basically gave up on bare metal Fedora from 15 onwards - no coincidence that the frankly dreadful GNOME 3 came out at the same time. Once I saw how bad it was in a VM, my preferred OS became CentOS 6, whose combo of GNOME 2, GRUB 1 and SysVInit scripts (all of which are much easier to use than their "better" successors) remains probably the peak combo we've seen to date in a mainstream Linux distro.

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...