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 Core 3: Worth The Upgrade?

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the embarrassment-of-riches dept.

Red Hat Software 498

Chris writes "With new features such as SELinux, GNOME 2.8, KDE 3.3, Evolution 2.0, Remote Desktop, Helix Player, and of course Firefox, it may be worth your while to make the switch. At OSDir our screenshot tour of Fedora Core 3 takes you through boot, installation, desktop, taskbar, menus, configuration, and the new features of this new release. Our Core 3 screenshot tours have taken you through Test 1, 2, 3, and now the final release. Check it out."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Screenshot tour? (5, Insightful)

fpga_guy (753888) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818688)

Sorry, but screenshots are not what this is about. Let's talk about features baby, I want substance!

There's a lot more to an OS than the damn window manager!

Re:Screenshot tour? (-1, Redundant)

fpga_guy (753888) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818716)

The mods will punish me for this, but when's the last time a first post went +5 insightful?

Go you good thing, go!

Re:Screenshot tour? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818735)

Im someone who uses whatever distro happens to come with a free magazine - and use it as my only OS!.
Good'ol slackware 10.0 came free at about the time I bought my new wonder machine (desktop)and thats what I use today.
I have no interest in anything else - Slackware 10.0 is a brilliant OS. I was almost going to use Fedora Core 2 64 bit edition - what a mistake that would have been.
My next machine will be a Via laptop or some other cheap one, and it will be loaded with whatever OS happens to be around in a free magazine. If theres only crap like Yopper etc. I will download Slackware 13.0 or whatever its at at that time.

Slashdot moderators should be executed for their crimes!

Re:Screenshot tour? (3, Insightful)

northcat (827059) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818794)

There's a lot more to an OS than the damn window manager!

But thats what most newbies (who come from windows) seem to care right now...

Re:Screenshot tour? (4, Interesting)

Hammer (14284) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818902)

A fancy-schmancy gooey during install may be nice or a BIG bother.
The important is wether it works or not. I gave up on RH/FC with FC2. It insisted on installing and starting a whole bunch of shit that I explicitly unchecked. Examples:
  • install and start IR on an old server that neither has nor ever will have IR interface
  • install and start CUPS on a server that neither has nor will have access to a printer

The reason "it has to be installed to satisfy dependencies". In previous RH/FC you could ignore those dependencies in expert mode. Now I spent lotsa time turning of stuff that didn't do anything (I wonder WTF the IR daemon actually does on a server w/o IR card???)
Now I use Mandrake/slackware. I might try the new SuSE...

PF (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818693)


You are better off to wait. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818695)

]$ cat /etc/yum.conf
de buglevel=2
pkgpolicy=ne west
exa ctarch=1

# PUT YOUR REPOS HERE OR IN separate files named file.repo
# in /etc/yum.repos.d

It is a little empty compared to the preconfigured Fedora Core 2 and 1.

Re:You are better off to wait. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818706)

maybe you should read the file, and look in yum.repos.d ...

Re:You are better off to wait. (1)

un1xl0ser (575642) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818827)

Is there anything in yum.repos.d?

I did a "yum upgrade yum" using test3 and the upgraded package didn't give me any files in repos.d.

Put in a bug report and they mentioned setting a variable (exactarch=0). It was marked as notabug, however I don't understand why.

http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi ?i d=137967

Size? (4, Interesting)

News for nerds (448130) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818696)

Everytime I see those Fedora releases I'm overwhelmed by the DVD size download. Why don't you make a stripped down version with the CD size a la Firefox?

Re:Size? (5, Informative)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818701)

AFAIK a minimal install only uses the first CD. A default workstation install uses three, but barely touches the last. I don't know what a default desktop install uses.

Re:Size? (1)

iamthemoog (410374) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818721)

If it's anything like the old redhat releases, it'd annoyingly only use the third CD if you're not using a US keyboard or region. Pain in the arse to download the whole third CD just because one single region-specific package is on it... Can't remember which .RPM it was though, sorry...

Re:Size? (5, Insightful)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818704)

I'm overwhelmed by the DVD size download

Well, don't download the DVD in the first place. Download the three CDs with the .torrent file that's provided.

Re:Size? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818732)

So where's the 1 CD version?

Surely they can do what Microsoft can with their bloated Windows XP?

Damn multi-CD distros not using the fact we're *gasp* usually connected to the Internet and can download what we want.

Re:Size? (5, Informative)

prefect42 (141309) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818768)

In which case do the HTTP install, and don't even download that much. I think the rescuecd can function for this purpose, and it's fairly small (about 80 meg).

Re:Size? (1, Insightful)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818782)

Since when is Windows XP equivalent to Fedora?

Windows XP doesn't give you:
  • several office suites
  • several work environments (KDE & GNOME & XFCE)
  • webserver + mail server + mailing list manager
  • proxy server
  • cd burner, visual HTML composer
  • a complete set of development tools
  • network tools to work in other than native networking environments (Samba)
  • a lot more games
  • localization for lots of languages
  • a lot more that I forget right now.

Now, if you would like to add to the windows XP cd the 4 that come only with office, you'll get a lot more than that.

Also, there are 1 cd distros: see Knoppix, for example. Not every distribution has to be exactly the same and suited just for you.

Re:Size? (0, Offtopic)

Tim C (15259) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818815)

webserver + mail server

Both come with Win2k and XP Pro (I believe that IIS provides SMTP service support, although I've never used it). It's a separate install, but it's right there on the CD

a complete set of development tools

They're available as a separate download - the vast majority of Windows users neither want nor need them.

cd burner

Integrated into Explorer, as long as all you want to do is burn files to a CD (eg no ISO support).

Re:Size? (-1, Offtopic)

strider44 (650833) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818894)

sorry to bother you but I think he meant a web server that won't get your computer hacked in fifteen minutes.


Re:Size? (1)

say (191220) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818908)

a complete set of development tools

They're available as a separate download - the vast majority of Windows users neither want nor need them.

I don't even know what separate download you refer to, but it is not the equivalent of a standard linux distribution development environment (unless you actually use cygwin and get the same environment). Considering that the discussion was about the size of linux distros compared to windows installation discs, what is available as a separate download is completely irrelevant.

Re:Size? (3, Insightful)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818790)

Damn multi-CD distros not using the fact we're *gasp* usually connected to the Internet and can download what we want.

Not everyone has high-speed internet you know.

REDHATE SUCKS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818886)

Sucks to be you.

Re:Size? (4, Insightful)

Taladar (717494) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818897)

Even more reason not to let them download whole CDs but only the packages they need.

Re:Size? (-1, Offtopic)

strider44 (650833) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818884)

Damn multi-CD distros not using the fact we're *gasp* usually connected to the Internet and can download what we want.

I'm not sure whether that's a comment made in comparison to other distros, but, just in case, here is...

A brief broadband linux tutorial:

Debian [debian.org]

Ubuntu [ubuntu.com]

Arch [archlinux.org]

Gentoo [gentoo.org]

The end.

Re:Size? (1)

DigitumDei (578031) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818773)

The issue here is that it does require 3 CDs worth of downloading. It would be nice if they could provide a single CD install with the most common stuff an then the ability to download extra iso's of programs if you so wish.

While a lot of people won't care about it, those with lesser connections do.

Re:Size? (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818865)

The stripped down version is CD 1, which allows you to do a "minimal" install.

Fedora is a testbed for RedHat Enterprise Linux. As such, it tends to have a lot of cutting edge tools, which get tested and refined into things that are worth putting into RHEL. That's how RedHat justifies doing this completely "free" release but providing to consumer grade support.

The result is not bad. Patches are fast, feature additions are fast and furious, and they do seem to be listening to complaints in their bugzilla quite well and fixing them ASAP.

SuSE (1, Redundant)

Ambient_Developer (825456) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818700)

Fedora Core I have never tried, I dunno if I ever will either. I think red hat can do better as a company. Being the market leader I would like to see a little more out of a company than what red hat has put forth. It will take much to pull me away from SuSE / Mandrake favorites. Not only that, all these "features" in fedora, are already in other distros so I guess I don't see what the big deal is.

Re:SuSE (1)

bcmm (768152) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818727)

I've tried it and abandoned it. Everything is too customized, for example you can't turn that desktop off and revert to the standard KDE theme unless you install it manually (this presumably means that their KDE package is rather different from what KDE releases; this is probably true of many other packages). There is too much Red Hat branding around the place. And packages like make and gcc are missing from the default install, as if they want to force you to use RPMs.

Re:SuSE (1)

Ambient_Developer (825456) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818744)

There is no GCC on default install? why? Suse has done this with their 1 disk personal edition also. I really don't get why these companys think they do not need GCC. Mandrake has it though, but I still love SuSE, due to yast :-).

Re:SuSE (3, Interesting)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818763)

My first experience with Linux (I'm 15 now, so I've only been going about a year) was somewhat destroyed by not being able to install much, simply because my distro didn't ship with gcc - not just the default install, but missing entirely from the cd. And then I had 56k.

You have no idea how quickly I switched to RH8.

Re:SuSE (1)

Ambient_Developer (825456) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818778)

Yast seems to make up for any SuSE short comings in my opinions (and there are very few). If you actually BUY SuSE it comes with sum 8 cds or so, infact I seem to remember it being one of the larger distro's being the first to sell on DVD I believe. Yast is really nice, and gcc; you can always get from some place.

Re:SuSE (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818810)

It wasn't SuSE that I had, can't remember what it was, I threw out the cd when I was able to get hold of RH.

And anyway, I was on 33k, it was easier to go and borrow a book from the library that had the cds for a proper distro than it would have been to download all the stuff I wanted.

I use Gentoo now anyway, the setup process doesn't matter that much to me anymore.

Re:SuSE (1)

Taladar (717494) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818915)

Yast is one of the major SuSE short comings in my opinion. Because of Yast you can not configure anything manually via config files which means if you have a problem you have to search for other SuSE users with the same problem instead of being able to use any infos from users of any distro with similar problems.

buy CDs (1, Offtopic)

poptones (653660) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818871)

RPM sucks ass. I used mandrake for the longest, but never again. I never realized how easy linux could be until I used a debian distribution.

Ubuntu is a fantastic distribution, easy to install and with good support. It's a single CD which they will send you free for the asking and, because it uses debian, you can order an assload of easy to install software on 7Cds for about ten bucks. I don't have broadband either but I do if I take my laptop into town, but even with all that free bandwidth it's still cheaper just to order the CDs [easylinuxcds.com] (even at a couple MBps it takes HOURS to download seven CDs!)

Talking of Remote Desktop (5, Interesting)

iamnotacrook (816556) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818714)

Theres a feature which works remarkably well under Windows XP, much faster and seamlessly than most remote X window logins. I'm not surprised they want to call that feature by the same name. Strange considering that network transparency is supposed to be X's strongpoint.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (1)

itzdandy (183397) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818784)

this is the same protocal, and can connect to windowsXP hosts. this is RDP not VNC or remote X

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818853)

The screenshot states that to connect remotely you should use the "vncviewer" command - that ISN'T remote desktop. I have it installed on my gentoo box for when the occassion demands...

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (3, Insightful)

l3v1 (787564) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818804)

much faster and seamlessly than most remote X window logins

Unfortunately (i.e. for Windows) that's not all someone wants from remote sessions. What I want e.g. is to allow many users concurrently logged on and using the machine through different X sessions, happily and joyfuly, and without needing to pay for a bag of licenses for being able to accomplish all this.

I'm not surprised they want to call that feature by the same name

Just a name won't buy them fame. What already has brought that fame was the possibility to have graphical truly multiuser remote sessions long before MS started to think about adding network support.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (2, Insightful)

Erik Hollensbe (808) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818858)

Well, as someone who uses ARD and RDP a lot, X as a network protocol is long in the tooth by today's standards. It's just barely above VNC as far as network usage is concerned, especially because it was meant to render Widget sets like Motif and Xt and now it's doing GTK and Enlightenment.

Besides, terminal server has been out for years, if that's what you need.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (1)

Lispy (136512) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818809)

It's not a Fedora thing at all. It's part of Gnome 2.8 and it works very well.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818844)

The primary difference being xp restricts me to just 1 login per system. And oh yeah when I login the user at the system I'm logining into is notified and so, I can only login in if they allow me. Oh, and the best feature of xp's remote desktop is, when I'm logined in remote and someone at the local machine logins in I can kicked of the remote machine no questions asked. X yeah its not perfect either, but at least I can just login via a shell and run a few apps remotely, so can my friend, so can my classmates, and theres no expensive licenses to do so either just regular X.
Also, before we talk of X remote performance have you tried the latest X? It supports a new damage extension which improves the performance of remote apps a lot.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (2, Interesting)

Bake (2609) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818892)

My favourite part about the Remote Desktop the fact that it's like screen(1) in that I can start an application and then leave it running while I disconnect from it. Then when I have moved to another location I can connect and the application is running right where I left it.

Re:Talking of Remote Desktop (1)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818898)

From the screenshots it looks like they're using vncserver/vncviewer to accomplish this.

My understanding is that this requires that you use the Xvnc X server, and then probably attach to it locally via a regular X server. This is probably NOT accellerated at all for particular hardware, and requires that you run two X servers (which has to add at least a little overhead).

I contemplated this setup at home so that I could seemlessly access my X session from another windows-based computer at home if the KVM on my linux box was in use already, but I decided it probably wasn't worth the pain especially with the extra overhead and probable loss of accelleration.

Now, since Fedora is aimed at business users maybe the loss of accelleration is no big deal. For a server they would probably be accessing the server remotely anyway.

The problem with X11 is that the seamless network interface works real well in one direction - launching a remote application on your local screen. What it doesn't do well is taking a remote application already attached to a remote screen, and moving the window to a local screen - at least not without some support for this built into the individual application. You can always kill the app and re-launch it, and for many well-built apps this is fine since they'll checkpoint on a SIGTERM and launch gracefully.

On the other hand, if you have an app which doesn't save state open on one computer with 12 unsaved open, and you want to continue browsing from a different computer, then you're kind of out-of-luck unless you have something like vnc.

Lack of Java rpms and other stuff (4, Informative)

suso (153703) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818723)

As I found out the hard way over this past weekend, they left out all the java and java related rpms that FC2 had.

Are they using two different development teams for Fedora the way RedHat did for the x.1 and x.[02] releases?

Re:Lack of Java rpms and other stuff (4, Informative)

Nailer (69468) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818779)

Are you sure FC2 included Java packages? Such items are usually included on an extras CD, but shouldn't be part of FC unless their licensing permits them to - unlikely to be the case with the 2 popular closed-source JVMs.

That saiud, the Java Packaging Project (which includes some Red Hat staff) have repositories for FC.

Re:Lack of Java rpms and other stuff (1)

bodgit (658527) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818792)

As I found out the hard way over this past weekend, they left out all the java and java related rpms that FC2 had.

Try taking a look at JPackage [jpackage.org] which has a far more comprehensive collection of Java packages.

The problem was these clashed horribly with older Fedora Core releases that shipped some incompatible Java packages, but 3 should be the start of it working better.

Windows HDD Killing Bug? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818726)

Can anyone confirm whether or not this version still has the bug which makes NTFS partitions unbootable without some serious recovery work? I nuked my system with FC2 and would not like to deal with the same issues again if I decide to try FC3.

Also, have they got IEE1394 working yet? It wasn't turned on by default in FC2, I know, because of some bugs..

Re:Windows HDD Killing Bug? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818777)

Yeah lilo and grub can tend to lag a little on HD technology and then there is the whole NTFS write drama. (Yes yes Microsoft is evil). A simple solution, if you've got extra harddrives as an option, is to use (a)resource drive(s) and then get those little mobile racks which are ~$25 bucks for system drives, one for linux, one for windows. But usually if you use the software that most manufacuters provide with retail drives and frequently make available for download, you can recover from such errors, assuming you use it preventatively. Ultimately, the extra hardware, while something of a captial investment, is just so much simpler, I'm very happy I did it.

Re:Windows HDD Killing Bug? (2, Informative)

lauterm (655930) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818901)

Supposedly the NTFS killing bug was specific to upgrading to FC2. I don't remember the details, but a clean install is preferable anyway with the LVM and SELinux changes.

Worth the upgrade? (4, Interesting)

smartin (942) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818731)

I upgraded from Core 2 on the weekend and in a word, yes. It's very polished, all of my complaints with Core 2 seem to have been fixed, specifically burning CDs. It even recognized my firewire DVD burner and was able to burn a data dvd on the first try. The only nit so far is that the NVidia drivers (downloaded from NVidia) don't work. Appearently there is a work around for this and I am sure that it will be corrected soon.

Re:Worth the upgrade? (4, Informative)

Soko (17987) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818793)

The nvidia failure can be due to 2 things:

You have SELinux turned on. I've set mine to "Warn" until I understand it just a bit better. If you didn't turn it on, keep reading.

Once SELinux is disabled, run these in order:
[root@rsd800fc3 ~]# modprobe nvidia
[root@rsd800fc3 ~]# cp -a /dev/nvidia* /etc/udev/devices
[root@rsd800fc3 ~]# chown root.root /etc/udev/devices/nvidia*
Should fix you up. The reason AFAICT is that the NVIDIA driver is not aware of udev, which FC3 now uses.

BTW, NVIDIA released a new driver the evening FC3 was released - go get that too : 1.0-6629 [nvidia.com]


Re:Worth the upgrade? (2, Informative)

smartin (942) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818835)

The NVidia problem is discussed here [lwn.net] with a work around. Hopefully the new version mentioned above will solve it.

Re:Worth the upgrade? (5, Informative)

Soko (17987) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818885)

The new version does not solve the udev issue - you still have to run those three commands.


Re:Worth the upgrade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818876)

I guess that's what I get for hitting reply, and then getting up to make breakfast. You beat me to it.

Re:Worth the upgrade? (2, Informative)

OneHungLo (265284) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818868)

I was in the exact same boat. CD burning never worked in FC2, unless I wanted to manually run mkisofs and cdrecord from Bash. It works fine in FC3 with the built-in CD/DVD Creator, and with K3B.

The NVidia driver is only a real problem because of "UDEV" or whatever it's called. I guess it's supposed to dynamically load all the drivers at boot time, but it won't load them unless they were a part of the initial driver installation. If your machine is hanging at "Configuring Kernel Parameters" on the boot screen, run the FC3 rescue CD, mount your root filesystem and do
chroot /mnt/sysimage
vi /boot/grub/grub.conf
(or whatever your favorite editor is)

Locate the line that points to your current FC3 installation, remove "rhgb", and change the 5 to 3, so that instead of trying to load the graphical boot and go to runlevel 5, it will put you in a runlevel 3 terminal. Save your changes, exit, remove the CD, and restart your machine. Boot into FC3, and you should be at your terminal. Log in as root, and do this:
modprobe nvidia
cp -a /dev/nvidia* /etc/udev/devices
chown root.root /etc/udev/devices/nvidia*
If you want, after that is finished you can edit your /boot/grub/grub.conf again, change the runlevel back to 5, and re-add rhgb. Once you reboot, as long as you made the xorg.conf adjustments in the NVidia installer README, your machine should boot normally.

Now if only they would include kernel source in a default installation, it would be almost perfect.

Re:Worth the upgrade? (1)

OneHungLo (265284) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818907)

Sorry, I made a mistake there. Instead of
modprobe nvidia
You need to do
/sbin/modprobe nvidia
For some reason, FC3 puts all the module loading/unloading stuff in /sbin.

I don't want pretty menus on install (1)

Viol8 (599362) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818738)

I realise I'm going against the more-windows-than-windows trend these days, but I really don't want fancy install screens , pull down menus and all other eye candy junk when I do an install. I just want a nice clean simple text based interface that asks me what I want to install then just gets on with it (ie like Slackware). A friend on mine tried to install mandrake 10.1 but because he was a wierd video card and mandrake (apparently) insists on using a GUI installer he kept getting unexplained crashes. Well ins't that nice. The irony is he only wanted the linux box as a samba server anyway so the GUI side was a complete irrelevance!

Re:I don't want pretty menus on install (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818774)

The irony is he only wanted the linux box as a samba server anyway so the GUI side was a complete irrelevance!

I was just wondering, if all he needed was a samba server, what reason was there for choosing Mandrake?

And anyway, if you don't like it don't use it. There are plenty of other distros to try.

Re:I don't want pretty menus on install (2, Interesting)

HazE_nMe (793041) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818786)

As the other replier stated you can install without the GUI, in fact when I installed Mandrake 10.1CE on my recently aquired (for free) Gateway 2000 G6-266 (pentium2 266mhz with 32mb edo ram) it automagically loaded the non-gui install without giving me an option to choose. Took forever to install compared to my other boxes, but it finished without a hitch.

Re:I don't want pretty menus on install (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818822)

Hate to reply twice, but in RH8 you could use the "linux text" option from the cd to install without the GUI, IIRC. I don't know if you can still do this with Fedora though, since I use Gentoo.

Re:I don't want pretty menus on install (1)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818893)

Yes, this works fine. Also, Fedora is quite nice about using the "yum" command to fetch the particular package you want and all its dependencies, or removing them, after your OS is installed.

Re:I don't want pretty menus on install (1)

Erik Hollensbe (808) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818845)

I know this is a dirty word on slashdot, but have you tried FreeBSD?

From what you're describing, it sounds like it'd be right up your alley. Slack is very BSD-like (or at least, it used to be) and you'll feel right at home, and it's network installer, IMO, has yet to be beat (2 floppies + network connection, 1 working system an hour later - painless).

I had the same problem you experienced with Mandrake with both SuSE and FC2. Although, these days I'm using a mac as my workstation - can't be beat if you can afford it.

Can't stand it (4, Informative)

Gambit Thirty-Two (4665) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818741)

I installed it on a fresh xeon 2.6ghz and I was abhorred at the slowdown. FC2 was a LOT faster than this is.

I'm not talking of booting into X and doing things in there. I'm talking just getting to a login prompt and attempting to sign on.

I'll go back to slackware before I load FC3 again

Re:Can't stand it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818767)

Do you have any statistics you would like to share with the rest of /.??? Seems like a knee-jerk post to me.

Yuck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818742)

Avoid FC3 like the plague. It's buggy and awful, imo: too many big changes (switching to udev for one) too fast. The sheer number of bug-fix updates released for it already should back me up.

Overcompensating for something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818745)

Look at the size of that taskbar task [osdir.com].

Vanilla GNOME? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818749)

So I take it from the screenshots that Fedora now has a GNOME desktop layout similar to plain, vanilla GNOME, rather than the more traditional Windows-style layout of application launcher in the bottom-left corner?

Looks a lot better, at least in my opinion.

You know... (-1, Redundant)

Phil246 (803464) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818765)

Some of the stories on /. sound remarkably like an advert by someone trying to ( for some unknown reason ) get their server slashdotted. has slashdot become merely a " adverts for geeks, stuff that doesnt always matter ( or survive ) " site ?

that aside, ive still to get around to upgrading my fedora install to fc3. i think ill wait another week or so for any potential problems to have been found out by others ( read: i feel lazy )

ho hum...

Re:You know... (1)

David Horn (772985) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818821)

I've been thinking along the same lines recently. What's the point in submitting a story to /. when it's patently obvious your server isn't going to be able to hold up? 20 comments and it's gone down, and, of course, most Caches are useless for things like screenshots.

If you're going to faff around hosting pictures at least try to spread the load a bit. My site got /.'d and it struggled to stay afloat, and it's a dual P4 dedicated server with 1GB of RAM.

This article contains next to no useful info (5, Informative)

Nailer (69468) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818769)

Frankly, a whole bunch of numbered image files does not make for a Fedora review. Personally, I can't even bother sorting through them all.

I run Fedora Rawhide on my laptop. This would be the equivalent of say, Debian Unstable. So I have a good idea of what FC3 offers...

- Bluecurve theme finally covers everything.In particular, Firefox and OpenOffice look like every other KDE or Gnome app.

- If what I've seen in the RHEL 4 beta is the same for Fedora, partitioning now uses LVM by default. There's a new GUI LVM config tool called 'system-config-lvm' in Rawhide to provide the post-install disk resizing. Additionally, online resizing with ext3 should work and, if you use RHEL, be supported.

- Firefox and Thunderbird.

- SELinux turned on, including policies for locking down Apache, Bind, and NIS. A GUI config tool is provided for this.

- There's apparently improvements to yum which I'm not sure about. Personally, I'm a fan of up2date, which can use directories full of packages (without needing index files) as one of its sources.

- Udev. /dev only includes devices that actually exist in your system. This is kinda nice. e2labelas deprecated, as there's now a whole bunch of ways to uniquely refer to devices rather than just their label. This is good for people who hot plug a lot of devices.

- HelixPlayer is now included by default.

- Bash 3 - not much difference for me, apart from the new inbuilt range system that obsoletes the old 'seq' command. If you call it as /bin/sh, it runs as Old School Bourne shell.

Re:This article contains next to no useful info (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818796)


With your overview this rather silly story (OMG Screeeenshots!1!!!!11) was worth reading after all.

Sweet since you're the one with information I want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818798)

With the SELinux am I correct in assuming that the more typical ownership is replaced with ACL's, and the GUI config tool for said things is at least halfway nice?

ACLs (1)

Nailer (69468) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818889)

ACLs are seperate from SELinux. They're properly called an 'extended attribute'. They're a superset of normal permissions - ie, they allow multiple users and multiple groups different access levels on a single file.

- When listing a dir, 'ls' shows a + next to the permissions on files that have ACLs.

- The command 'getfacl' shows a files ACLs, and 'setfacl' allows you to change them.

- The GUI to change them doesn't exist. There's an entry in Bugzilla for 'ability to see / edit access control lists' though.

Re:This article contains next to no useful info (4, Insightful)

Erik Hollensbe (808) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818831)

I guess this works for some people, but as someone who works with most of his machines remotely, Fedora is a giant piece of poo.

The symlink/script mess that is SELinux is not fun to play with when you are trying to install third party packages. Sure, your GUI tool may be nice, but I guess I have better things to do than to wait for a X window to refresh between the west coast and chicago.

It's a disturbing linux trend and bothers me quite a bit - many systems contort rc.d beyond comprehension - good luck writing init scripts that properly load on boot without having to run an obscene number of shell scripts and touch a few config files. gentoo has a whole damn bourne shell "replacement" for running init scripts. It's disgusting. And it's guaranteed to be different on every linux distribution, and often between releases as well.

And it seems, that a great deal of the work being done today is to make linux more useful on the desktop - strangely, I feel like I'm being alienated on the server.

I think that debian and slackware are the only systems left that have any sanity in the linux world.

Actually, the parent could be improved too... (4, Interesting)

Nailer (69468) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818852)

Cause it had nothing negative to say... so here's the bad stuff about Fedora, from someone who uses it, knows it well, and still likes it moe than other distros:

- Lack of a good GUI config tool installing packages. Ideally, system-config-packages should use up2date (rhn/yum/apt/dir) repositories to pull its packages from. Synaptic's the closest thing, but it only works with apt repositories.

- As painful as it seems for the Gnome guys to either test this out or believe anyone who says so, most users disable spatial Nautilus. This should be done by default. However otherwise the Gnome on FC3 feels great, particularly the file associations and launcher editing tools.

- Garret no longer works for Red Hat. Hence the new wallpaper for FC3 is kinda ugly compared to previous masterpieces.

- Needs a default sudoers file that allows particular groups of commands (but not all) to be run with root privileges by paricular users. I checked this into bugzilla so it should be there for the next release.

- General Linux stuff. Eg, I'd like the re-architected X servers fd.o are proposing - where X sits on top of OpenGL drivers - the only driver necessary to run a card. This involves replacing the current X drivers tho. It'll happen, but it'll take a long time...

Re:Actually, the parent could be improved too... (1)

Erik Hollensbe (808) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818870)


I guess I'm just amazed that a "review" of "linux" is basically a bunch of criticisms of X.

Try 'visudo', for crying out loud. It's a very clean and easy to use interface.

Documentation? (4, Insightful)

barcodez (580516) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818770)

Seriously, this is the first thing I check nowadays when evaluating software. If the documentation is bad you can wasted days, weeks, months trying to resolve problems - frankly I value my time too much. So can those in the know profer some opinions on the quality of the documentation?

Functionality (-1, Troll)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818776)

Sorry, RedHat. I like listening to MP3s and watching DVDs. I have no time for distros that do not include that functionality. Take your balls out of Corporate America's purse and we'll talk.

Re:Functionality (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818834)

Damn trolls.

Take your balls out of Corporate America's purse and we'll talk


From Fedorafaq.org ..

In the United States and some other countries, you may have to pay patent royalties to use MP3 players or encoders. However, for home users, there is no legal problem with MP3 players.

I experienced some problems with Fedora Core 3 (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818788)

FC3 is really fast on my Athlon 1.4Ghz Thunderbird and it has really good font rendering but I experienced some hurdles:

My system has both EIDE devices and SCSI devices. If I use eg. my EIDE cdrom drive I cannot use my SCSI cdrw drive anymore as this system seems to use the ide-scsi emulation layer per default. The SCSI cdrw is only detected by Nautilus if I put a cd into it (I don't like these autostarters)

I tried to build ReZound http//rezound.sf.net/ [slashdot.org] but it failed to compile

Neither does Audacity

When compiling MPlayer it fails to build with GUI and it fails to play sound if you playback a video

These are problems which I don't have with my other SuSE system (on the same machine)

JAVA: I don't like to have gcj installed instead of a real JVM

MP3: none of the installed sound tools can play or record MP3 files

The eth0 device is automatically detected but the DSL configuration doesn't configure eth0 to be used with pppd. As a result the kernel tries to start eth0 but fails and the pppd connection starts afterwards. This unnecessarily slows down the boot process.

Evolution 2.0 (2, Interesting)

fpedraza (757989) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818801)

Included in FC3, has less features than the 1.4 series and it's not (IMO) nearly as beautiful. Is it possible to downgrade? Has anybody tried?

Why the mucking with the packages? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818803)

Why no linux src rpm?

upgrades are stupid and pointless (2, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818847)

What is the point of upgrading, really? I mean, if the software offers a substantial, useful upgrade, then go for it. However, if you're just doing it for more widgets and later version with minimal changes, what's the point?

There's a negligible difference between Mandrake 10.x and Debian Sid or Sarge. One is supposedly cutting edge, while debian gets hell for being 'behind'. The only 'behind' I see is that debian doesn't tend to set everything for the user up automatically - good or bad, your call. That's all

I really see in new releases of distros like mandrake and fedora - more automation and 'seamless' operation for the newbie type. That's all good, I guess, if you're looking to get Windows-like acceptance and saturation one day, but I guess it's not for me. Hell, I don't even use hotplug because it irritates me. *g*

gcc version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818848)

Beware though, FC3 comes with gcc-3.4.
Make sure the C++ libraries you use compile with this version before pressing the little UPDATE button.

Stability (4, Interesting)

roalt (534265) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818854)

I'm pretty interested in the stability of this release: FC2 was one of the worst, even with all yum updates. Okay, it works okay for desktop usage (I still use it), but as server or as workstation it crashes a bit too much.

I really-really hope that we can get stability back from version 7.2-7.3 which were still the best 'red hat' releases when it comes to stability.

Something to think about (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818860)

before people start complaining about stability and features, FC is a developer oriented experimental type OS. it's not meant to be as "polished" or have as many neat stable features as other distros, this is a test platform.

if you want stable releases of everything, 3rd party apps(that aren't free software) and corporate support, go get novell, suse, mandrake, slackware, whatever, but don't bitch about FC.

fstab (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818863)

I'm not a fan of the HAL daemon. I can't edit /etc/fstab. As a result, I can only play my CD's as root. It won't recognize my audio disc.

No (on my PC) (2, Interesting)

Val314 (219766) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818864)

i had Fedora 2 on this PC (and Fedora 3 Test2) installed, both worked fine, but Fedora 3 final refuses to boot.

i have tried an upgrade, fresh install (ereased and recreated all partitions), nothing helped. it stopped everytime at different points in the boot process.

PC is a P4C 2.8 GHz, i865PE, 512 MB Ram, Geforce 4Ti so nothing really special about it

this my be isolated to my PC or not, but stuff like this stopps People from trying Linux. (i'm not really sure if i should re-install Fedora 2)

Yes, to Debian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818872)

We upgraded from RH73 to Debian and, yes, it was worth the upgrade. Wished we had done this sooner.

Fedora Core -- Worth Using? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818888)

I switched from Mandrake 9.2 (at the time) to Fedora Core 1 -- which sucked ass. I don't know if it got better in 2 or 3, but I'm sticking with Mandrake 10. (BTW, I also tried Debian, but the version of Grub included screwed up my MBR and caused me to have to painstakingly reinstall the WHOLE computer from the bottum up).

could linux BE any more secure? (1)

sunami (751539) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818899)

The answer is yes. Fedora 3 uses a government level of security. The FBI (or was it CIA, they're all the same) created their own linux version, with their own level of security (think ultra-high). Since it had to be open-source, that security has been added into Core 3. I don't know much more else about it, except that you have full control over each file's security settings, haven't had much time to really look in to it.

Virtual Fedora (1)

Sonicat (831165) | more than 9 years ago | (#10818910)

To install Fedora on MS Virtual PC or VMware under Windows is a mega-mess. Same with Suse. Shame it!

Wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10818913)

Did they correct the stupid 4K Stack thing in the kernel? Everytime I reinstall FC I go download the latest kernel so I can use my wireless NIC (via ndiswrapper)
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account