×

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!

Red Hat Fedora Core 4 Test 1 Now Available

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the are-ipods-plug-and-play-yet dept.

Red Hat Software 300

krunchyfrog writes "The first test release of Fedora Core 4 is now available from Red Hat and at distinguished mirror sites near you, and is also available in the torrent. New features in Fedora Core 4 test 1 include previews of GCC 4.0, GNOME 2.10, and KDE 3.4, as well as support for the PowerPC architecture. Please file bugs via Bugzilla, Product Fedora Core, Version fc4test1, so that they are noticed and appropriately classified. Discuss this release on fedora-test-list. -- The BitTorrent link is already there."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

300 comments

PPC (5, Insightful)

BibelBiber (557179) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951712)

Hopefully PPC works as expected. It's a shame that this platform is so poorly supported.

Re:PPC (2, Interesting)

tabkey12 (851759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951749)

EVen more important as Yellow Dog Linux [yellowdoglinux.com] is moving inch by inch to a subscription model [ydl.net] for their products.

(For reference, Yellow Dog Linux is probably the biggest supplier of PPC LInux and the only supplier that sells Mac Hardware with Linux preloaded.)

Re:PPC (2, Interesting)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951784)

All the more reason to use Debian [debian.org] on PPC. There is a gentoo port too these days. Personally I prefer OS X on this hardware, but there are still a few linux choices out there.

Re:PPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951845)

All the more reason to use Debian on PPC

What, so the only serious developers willing to invest in PPC Linux and support it can wither and die?

Can't you spare them a buck or two?

Ubuntu too! (1)

vasi (140486) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951915)

They've got full PPC support, I had much better luck with it than Yellow Dog, Gentoo or Debian. But when one distro doesn't work another usually will, yay for variety and forking.

The (unofficial) PPC version of Fedora Core 3 unfortunately didn't work too well for me, so I'll be trying it again when FC4 final is released.

The full list of PPC distributions: here [penguinppc.org]

Re:Ubuntu too! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951972)

Can you please get that offensive Jig distribution, that me-too under Linuxen, out of my face?

Thanks.

Re:PPC (3, Insightful)

codeguy007 (179016) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952052)

As long as you want either all 32 or 64Bit libs. APT still can't handle multilib installs.

If you can handle a pure 64Bit distro debian is fine. But man I know I prefer not seeing those puzzle pieces in FireFox when I hit a flash site.

Re:PPC (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952095)

"If you can handle a pure 64Bit distro debian is fine. But man I know I prefer not seeing those puzzle pieces in FireFox when I hit a flash site."

But man, you will see them no matter what on ppc linux, as there is no flash plugin for ppc linux, whether its 32 or 64bit.

Re:PPC (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951818)

EVen more important as Yellow Dog Linux is moving inch by inch to a subscription model for their products.

Niche market, bills to pay? Who'd have thought?

Re:PPC (1)

tabkey12 (851759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951886)

By the way, I understand that YDL are servicing a niche market, and what they are doing is entirely fair, but I still feel that people need free alternatives to try out Linux. Maybe having an Open Circulation Edition a lá Xandros would be a good idea.

So.... (4, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951995)

With Linus now doing ALL of his work on the PPC, and that IBM is making a big move into Linux on PPC, do you think that it will see a massive investment in time? I do.

YDL (1)

losman (840619) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952112)

First thing is that YDL has been a great solution on the PPC platform. I have had an WGS 8550, G3 Server and a G3 Yossmite running YDL 3 and YDL 4 for a good while and it is great! Support and community rocks as well.

Regarding a "free" distribution, YDL is free. If you want to pay for YDL.net you get access to releases earlier along with other great features. If you want installation support alone you can by the product with it. If you want to just buy the CDs you can as well. And if you want to just download the ISOs for free you can.

I paid for my CDs without support to help chip to a fablous company!

Quick RPM Version Check (5, Informative)

rimu guy (665008) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951720)

Just been poring over the new RPM versions [redhat.com] ...

I see FC4 includes MySQL 4.1.10 a nice wee jump [mysql.com] up from 3.23. Apparently RedHat are now happy with the MySQL licensing terms [redhat.com] .

It has Eclipse 3.1 [eclipse.org] , dovecot, bash 3 (with debugger), Tomcat 5 [apache.org] (but only 5.0, not the declared stable 5.5.7), Xen 2 [cam.ac.uk] . And that is about all that caught my eye.

Having just been recompiling the RHEL4 sources [redhat.com] I'm struck by how similar the versions all are. I'm presuming that rhel4 split off fc4 or vice versa a month or two back. I'd be curious how/if they co-ordinate all the patches and source code between the two different brands.

--
FC3 (now!) and RHEL4-based (soon!) VPSs [rimuhosting.com]

Re:Quick RPM Version Check (5, Informative)

tbspit (460062) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951739)

They seem to have used a 2.0 beta version of OpenOffice.org as well (rpm has version 1.9.83).

Re:Quick RPM Version Check (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951824)

Having just been recompiling the RHEL4 sources...

Umm, why bother when you can just grab CentOS 4.0 [centos.org] instead?
(or one of the other RHEL-rebuild projects like Tao [taolinux.org] or Whiteboxlinux [whiteboxlinux.org] )

Re:Quick RPM Version Check (3, Interesting)

rimu guy (665008) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951856)

Presuming you're not trolling...

But we [rimuhosting.com] will be hosting lots of servers for our customers with some RHEL4-based distro.

I want to make sure that when an update comes out from the source [redhat.com] , that I am not wholly dependant on a middle [centos.org] man [whiteboxlinux.org] that not be able to or capable of a prompt update release.

I'm still testing our recompile version. If it works out, then great. Otherwise, I'm confident now that even running a non-North American Enterprise Linux Vendor [pnaelv.net] version of RHEL4 I can always compile and distribute the errata udpates I need. (Well maybe except for a few kde packages, dbus and iproute which are spitting out heinous c++ errors at the mo).

RHEL4 vs Fedora Core 4 for a home server (1)

smartin (942) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951976)

I'm due to update my home linux server from RedHat 9 and have been debating whether I should put core 4 on it when it comes out or RHEL 4. This machine does file serving, web serving, runs mysql for various small databases, etc.

Is there any compelling reason to use one or the other for this type of machine?

Re:RHEL4 vs Fedora Core 4 for a home server (3, Informative)

tux_deamon (663650) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952020)

If you don't mind re-installing your OS every 6-12 mos, go with FC. It's always going to have the latest features. If you're looking for something with about 5 years of official support go with RHEL or an RHEL clone. For the type of service you're describing, you're probably fine with the present capabilities for some time to come.

Re:RHEL4 vs Fedora Core 4 for a home server (5, Informative)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952220)

Its important to note however that the 6-12 month reinstall cycle doesnt include a full format. Going from FC1 to FC2 certainly caused some minor problems for some folks, but since then I've seen very few complaints about being able to upgrade through yum and/or just inserting the CDs and updating. So in that regards its not too much different then a Service Pack in Windows world, except its a really really effective and useful service pack:) Also, Fedora legacy will support it for 1.5 years at a minimum and possibly more if the community sees interest in it. I'm looking really foward to this release, seems to have a ton of potential (although Core 5 seems like its going to be the big release of this year once Fedora Extras gets all figured out)
Regards,
Steve

Re:RHEL4 vs Fedora Core 4 for a home server (1)

LnxAddct (679316) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952237)

See my reply to the previous poster to your question Here. [slashdot.org] Personally, I've been very pleased using both RHEL and FC as servers for business and at home. If you'll be using this for critical stuff though go with RHEL and get the support if you can. Your list of requirements though isn't much and Fedora easily covers it all. My rule of thumb is usually: If its a profitable server, go with RHEL, otherwise go with FC.
Regards,
Steve

M*O*N*A*C*O (0, Offtopic)

(3067) (867811) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951731)

Hello,

I live in a casino, but I won't tell you where. Like Magnum, I'm allowed to "borrow" expensive Ferraris and drive them.

What's this got to do with FC4 I hear you ask.

Well the similarites don't stop there.

M*O*N*A*C*O

This story rates as 29% evil, 71% good (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951736)

http://homokaasu.org/gematriculator/

Points of interest:
Amount of vowels 161 161=7x23
Amount of consonants 241 2+4+1=7
Amount of different words 61 6+1=7
Amount of words beginning with consonant 58 5+8=13

Important phrases
Value of phrase "new features in fedora core 4 test 1 include previews of gcc 4." 3809 3809=13x293
Value of phrase "10, and kde 3." 84 84=7x12
Value of phrase "4, as well as support for the powerpc architecture." 3738 3738=7x534 3+7+3+8=21=7x3
Value of phrase "discuss this release on fedora-test-list." 2289 2289=7x327 2+2+8+9=21=7x3

Important words
Value of word "powerpc" 798 798=7x114
Value of word "there" 308 308=7x44
Value of word "they" 913 9+1+3=13
Value of word "from" 196 196=7x7x4
Value of word "noticed" 331 3+3+1=7
Value of word "architecture" 914 9+1+4=14=7x2
Value of word "that" 409 4+0+9=13
Value of word "fedora" 166 1+6+6=13
Value of word "discuss" 616 616=7x88 6+1+6=13
Value of word "you" 1060 1+0+6+0=7
Value of word "so" 160 1+6+0=7
Value of word "for" 156 156=13x12
Value of word "bugs" 409 4+0+9=13
Value of word "version" 714 714=7x102
Value of word "core" 158 1+5+8=14=7x2
Value of word "in" 59 5+9=14=7x2
Value of word "now" 610 6+1+0=7
Value of word "features" 707 707=7x101 7+0+7=14=7x2
Value of word "distinguished" 805 805=7x115 8+0+5=13
Value of word "writes" 904 9+0+4=13
Value of word "gcc" 13 13

The text you sent is 56% evil, 44% good (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952053)

Points of interest
Amount of consonants 427 427=7x61 4+2+7=13
Amount of different words 56 56=7x8
Amount of words beginning with vowel 49 49=7x7 4+9=13
Value of all words 81249 81249=7x11607

Important phrases
Value of phrase "" 3809 3809=13x293 value of phrase "10, and kde 3." 1760 1+7+6+0=14=7x2
Value of phrase "" 84 84=7x12 value of phrase "4, as well as support for the powerpc architecture." 5414 5+4+1+4=14=7x2

Word occurrences
word 21 21=7x3
value 25 2+5=7

Important words
Value of word "powerpc" 798 798=7x114
Value of word "gematriculator" 1036 1036=7x148
Value of word "phrases" 374 3+7+4=14=7x2
Value of word "that" 409 4+0+9=13
Value of word "they" 913 9+1+3=13
Value of word "from" 196 196=7x7x4
Value of word "noticed" 331 3+3+1=7
Value of word "amount" 651 651=7x93
Value of word "discuss" 616 616=7x88 6+1+6=13
Value of word "fedora" 166 1+6+6=13
Value of word "bugs" 409 4+0+9=13
Value of word "points" 489 4+8+9=21=7x3
Value of word "you" 1060 1+0+6+0=7
Value of word "so" 160 1+6+0=7
Value of word "for" 156 156=13x12
Value of word "there" 308 308=7x44
Value of word "words" 754 754=13x58
Value of word "version" 714 714=7x102
Value of word "architecture" 914 9+1+4=14=7x2
Value of word "phrase" 274 2+7+4=13
Value of word "org" 157 1+5+7=13
Value of word "beginning" 189 189=7x27
Value of word "homokaasu" 590 5+9+0=14=7x2
Value of word "core" 158 1+5+8=14=7x2
Value of word "in" 59 5+9=14=7x2
Value of word "now" 610 6+1+0=7
Value of word "features" 707 707=7x101 7+0+7=14=7x2
Value of word "distinguished" 805 805=7x115 8+0+5=13
Value of word "consonant" 574 574=7x82
Value of word "writes" 904 9+0+4=13
Value of word "gcc" 13 13

Can I update FC3 to FC4 Test 1 using yum? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951745)

Well, can I update to FC4 test 1 using yum?
Is it even possible? Since I know everyone will advise me against this, but I just want to know ;)

Re:Can I update FC3 to FC4 Test 1 using yum? (5, Informative)

irchs (752829) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951860)

Yes, just update the to the relevent fedora-release rpm and make sure the yum version of FC4T1's version, and run yum upgrade Jan

When will RPM-based distros change to .deb? (4, Interesting)

z1d0v (789072) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951980)

It seems that there are a lot of people starting to defend the use of the debian package for the easiness of dependencies treatment (and I'm not talking about debian folks like myself). So one might ask: will distros like Redhat/Fedora change the package manager in the future?

Since I don't use a RPM-based distro for a long time, I also feel the urge to ask: how is the dependencies treated nowdays?

Re:When will RPM-based distros change to .deb? (4, Informative)

davidkv (302725) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952049)

Dependencies are handled much the same way as with .debs. You can use apt, yum, up2date or red-carpet for automatic resolving/retreiving.

I doubt that Red Hat will change to another package manager in the foreseeable future. If something needs to be implemented, they'll change the rpm application/behaviour (as has been done numerous times).

Why should they? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952084)

"It seems that there are a lot of people starting to defend the use of the debian package for the easiness of dependencies treatment"

It seems there are a lot of people who don't know what they are talking about. debs don't resolve dependencies, apt does, as does yum, yast, urpm for rpm distros. And guess what, apt is also available for rpm distros, so what exactly is your point here?

Re:When will RPM-based distros change to .deb? (1)

bobsalt (575905) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952111)

I been using apt-get on fed since version1. I prefer it to yum. I started out using freshrpms apt-get, but have since migrated over to atrpms.net. (I believe they use the same reps?) very easy and fast to upgrade a new system.. wget http://download.atrpms.net/other/packages/fedora-3 -i386/atrpms/atrpms-kickstart-25-1.rhfc3.at.i386.r pm then type in apt-get update & apt-get dist-upgrade

Re:When will RPM-based distros change to .deb? (2, Interesting)

codeguy007 (179016) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952148)

Simple answer No definitely not. Though Synaptic is nice, apt cannot handle multilib dependencies like FC x86_64 provide. Yum is getting a graphical frontend (yumex) as well that though not working 100% is looking pretty good and in some ways is a lot nicer than Synaptic.

Feedback on Fedora? (0, Troll)

dotslashdot (694478) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951770)

I wanted to try Fedora to put another feather in my Linux cap. What is good/bad about Fedora? And whasup with the Fedora/Red Hat icon guy. He looks like he's never seen the Sun.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (3, Informative)

Abasher (778648) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951805)

Bad: The upgrade path (which forces you to burn a new CD-set for each new release), lacking multimedia support and confusing extra RPM-repos (these intertwine, since multimedia support can be added quite easily, IF you find the right repos, which doesn't cause version confilcts). Good: Rather stable, bleeding edge, large community and company backing it up.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951837)

Bad: The upgrade path (which forces you to burn a new CD-set for each new release),

That's fairly common, though, isn't it? Besides, you can always use CDRWs :-p

Besides, I find the install-over-FTP works well. Might even be able to use my FC3 network boot CD to install FC4T1?

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (2, Informative)

OneSmartFellow (716217) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951953)

There is no requirement to burn a new CD, you can easily install over HTTP, or FTP from any up to date mirror.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (1, Interesting)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951874)

Good: Looks pretty, up-to-date software, bugfix releases (eg will upgrade foo 1.1 to foo 1.2 if it fixes bugs), fast, SELinux built in, lots of software available

Bad: Buggy, upgrades frequently break stuff, short release cycle with no recommended upgrade path beyond reinstalling, yum is much slower than other package managers, FC users are guinea pigs for RH.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (1)

davidkv (302725) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951902)

Wrong. The upgrade path is by burning a CD/DVD and selecting "upgrade". You can also upgrade through yum or up2date, but it's not supported.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951940)

I hadn't seen that - does it keep settings etc, or is it just a scripted delete the system partition and replace it?

Not that I'd go back to FC any time soon, anyway. *shudder*.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (1)

stor (146442) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952002)

I hadn't seen that - does it keep settings etc, or is it just a scripted delete the system partition and replace it?

It may mostly just upgrade relevant packages, remove obsolete ones and installs new packages. I haven't looked at the code however and I'm sure it does more than that.
It seems to try to do the right thing i.e. retain current settings. It usually doesn't get everything right however (it's damn hard to when you think about it) and things break. Years ago it often broke things badly, these days I've found it to be OK.

Cheers
Stor

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (1)

codeguy007 (179016) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952182)

I upgraded from FC2 to FC3 and nothing was broken at all. The only issue I faced was that new packages offered in FC3 where not installed because no previous version had been. IE I had to add thunderbird with a yum install thunderbird after upgrading. Not a big deal at all.

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (2, Informative)

davidkv (302725) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952021)

It replaces packages through rpm. I've upgraded machines since at least RH7 up to FC3 both by CD and by using apt/yum/up2date. No user data is ever deleted.

Usually there are some small stuff that needs to be manually fixed, but it's hardly surprising since there are a few major changes in some upgrades (like SELinux, 2.6 kernel, udev and so on).

Re: yum (Was: Feedback on Fedora?) (2, Interesting)

pp (4753) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952215)

yum should be quite a bit faster in fc4test1, they've recently added a new xml parser (cElementTree) for the metadata which whips libxml2 ass (in fact, it's not much slower than reading plaintext in :))

Re:Feedback on Fedora? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951884)

"And whasup with the Fedora/Red Hat icon guy. He looks like he's never seen the Sun."

That's so we can relate to him.

GCC Version (-1, Troll)

basingwerk (521105) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951775)

I hope the gcc on this version works better than the one on Fedora Core 1. My makefiles make bad code on FC1, and I've more or less abandoned it. Now I do most of my stuff on Solaris instead.

Re:GCC Version (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951808)

I don't know what you mean by that makefile making bad code thing, but gcc 4.0 sports a new optimization infrastructure. I have been experimenting with it since October, and I found it to be far superior to 3.x. Also, the compilations times are reduced somewhat.On the whole I'm quite impressed by the improvements, though I'm not sure I'd base an operating system on a compiler which is not released yet...

Anyways, Gnome 2.10, Xen 2.0 and GCC 4.0 are quite enough reason for me to download FC4 Test 1 and try it out.

Re:GCC Version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951833)

My makefiles make bad code on FC1

Uh, so fix your makefiles? Luser error?

Download size question (3, Interesting)

IDkrysez (552137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951787)

Why are the binary torrent images listed as being bigger than the sources?? Er, am I being thick, huh?

Re:Download size question (4, Informative)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951889)

Source code compresses better than binary.

Re:Download size question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951951)

Source code compresses better than binary.

Oh, and what does that mean? Are you saying the uncompressed source and uncompressed binary are the same size? Are you saying that there's a fixed ratio of source code size to binary size? Because I don't think either of those are true, and without them you don't seem to have a relevant point.

Re:Download size question (1)

IDkrysez (552137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951970)

Across linux sources I've seen, binaries are less that source, uncompressed. So while it is obviously not a fixed ratio, the ratio of [uncompressed] source to binary is usually greater than 1, yah? ;)

If it really isn't relevant, please elucidate...

Re:Download size question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952211)

OK, let's consider this mathematically. And to keep it simple, let's say that the ratio of source to binary is fixed:
X = size of program source

c = ratio of compiled binary size to source size
a = compression ratio of source
b = compression ratio of binary
i.e.
cX = size of binary

aX = size of SRPM
bcx = size of RPM
and so this thread has gone
"Why is SRPM smaller than RPM?" i.e. aX < bcX

"Because source compresses more" i.e. a < b
That's not proof though: a < b does not imply a < bc unless we know that c > 1. But as you said
"ratio of [uncompressed] source to binary is usually greater than 1, yah?" i.e. 1/c > 1, i.e. c < 1
So you can't actually deduce the result "SRPMs smaller than RPMs" from Lachlan76's "source compresses more".

Re:Download size question (1)

IDkrysez (552137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951957)

Ah yes, I had just come to that too. I my late-night confusion, it seems somehow unfortunate.

The binaries are compressed too, and shouldn't the overall information in the binaries, accounting for the density-differential and compression, still be less? It just isn't...

Re:Download size question (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952034)

But because of the redundancy of the source code of not one, but hundreds/thousands of packages, the compression is much more efficient.

Re:Download size question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952161)

But because of the redundancy of the source code of not one, but hundreds/thousands of packages, the compression is much more efficient.

If they were compressed that way, maybe. But the SRPM ISOs are an uncompressed collection of individually compressed package sources so there's no cross-package gain.

Re:Download size question (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952213)

The sizes are usually around the same, so presumably they've done something to bloat the binaries. Perhaps lots of things are statically compiled, or they're unrolling/prelinking/etc. lots of things? Or just luck. It's usually pretty random which comes out bigger, at least IME.

KDE 3.4 translations (2, Insightful)

magi (91730) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951791)

I hope they'll wait for KDE 3.4.1. The .1 releases have traditionally been translation releases (unless something has changed recently).

It's rather frustrating to do translations, and then notice that they are never packaged in some Linux distributions, because the packagers don't have patience to wait for the translation release. Other than English-speaking people use Linux too, you know.

Well, probably most of the translations get in time for 3.4, so the problem isn't that big.

Re:KDE 3.4 translations (5, Interesting)

Vo0k (760020) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951831)

Honestly, I'm glad I learned English, comparing to translations.

Sometimes the translations are okay or nearly okay. Sometimes they are terrible. And worst if you get used to "native" version and then when translation appears, keyboard shortcuts are remapped to match new words. I LOATHE when suddenly aumix stops responding to Q for Quit and I must read help to see that now it's K as "Koniec" (and not W for Wyjdz, Z for Zakoncz, O for Opusc which are synonyms).
I feel thoroughly lost in "translated GIMP". Suddenly finding an option becomes tricky. "SOTA Chrome" becomes "Krysztal" while "Cristal" is being renamed to something yet different, and only by remembering the position in menu I'm able to guess where it is. Sure it's about "getting used to", but then some things are simply translated incorrectly and guessing their meaning in your native language is just impossible...

Learn English. It pays.

Re:KDE 3.4 translations (5, Insightful)

kiwibird (148721) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952083)

Users: learn English. Translators: keep translating.
Not just because of the importance of keeping languages alive (which is a controversial and "feely" issue no matter what), but because there'll always be users who don't have that much comprehension of English (and it's better to have some understanding of a program than none), and it'll expand the Linux user base. All of M$' programs are translated into my native language, why should free software be behind there? And users of free programs have the choice of using the original languages, whereas users of say Office buy a version in just one language. Keep translating...

Re:KDE 3.4 translations (4, Interesting)

anpe (217106) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952219)

I wish I had mod points. You're right, both sides are needed.
Not just because of the importance of keeping languages alive
I just read an article that correlated the use of a local language (as opposed to english mostly) with the vitality of the local research.
That is, the more you use your own language for research the more your research field is "creative" in your country.

Re:KDE 3.4 translations (3, Insightful)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952126)

Learning English is generally a good thing, but well translated software certainly has its place. The examples you mention show the opposite: remapping keys and translating proper names creates confusion, especially for the bilingual user.

My impression, however, is that one reason why somewhat competent users don't like software in their native language is because they don't really see that the English words they are already used to are all metaphors, but this becomes painfully obvious -- and weird -- when they see it in their native language. But the metaphor can be important for understanding how the UI is supposed to work. A child learning both computer use and English as a foreign language at the same time might be better off learning the localized metaphor for Firefox's 'tabs' and the everyday meanings of the word 'tab' in English.

Good translators can be hard to find, though. Especially if they are supposed to work for free.

Re:KDE 3.4 translations (-1, Flamebait)

Omni Magnus (645067) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951853)

I hope they'll wait for KDE 3.4.1. The .1 releases have traditionally been translation releases (unless something has changed recently).

It's rather frustrating to do translations, and then notice that they are never packaged in some Linux distributions, because the packagers don't have patience to wait for the translation release. Other than English-speaking people use Linux too, you know.

Well, probably most of the translations get in time for 3.4, so the problem isn't that big.

Yeah, but since English is the most common language in the PC using world, why in the hell should we have to wait for somebody to translate it for all of you hethens that do not speak English? I say include it as long as its relatively stable. As soon as it is translated, release the translations. Having the whole world wait for the distro to be translated into slqkssavaish or whatever is the newest Eastern European language is rather pointless.

IA-64 Support (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951862)

I am actually curious to see what this will do with the IA-64 arch. Not to mention what kind of performance increase you see in IA-64 with the 2.6 kernel. Anyone care to comment on anything they've witnessed?

PPC Expectations? (2, Interesting)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951926)

Can i expect the PPC version to run ok on my G3 Bronze?

What sort of stuff isnt going to work? ( yes, i did RTFA, didnt see what i was looking for )

All four users (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951950)



cheer. I use to be a loyal Red Hat user (yes I paid for the distro), but after being abandoned by Red Hat I switched to Suse. Give it a try. It is so much better than Fedora/Red Hat. You can get it for free here [novell.com]

So, still erasing windows partitions? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11951955)

Started in FC2. Didn't bother to try and fix it for FC3. How about FC4?

I haven't recommended trying FC{2,3} for people since that debacle, since most users I know who want to get into Linux are going to absolutely freak out when their windows partitions disappear (the fix may be simple, but why not just fix FC instead?).

Video4Linux 2 (1)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951964)

It's a shame that the included GnomeMeeting only supports the first version of the video4linux interface.

There are a few drivers (like sn9c102) for USB cameras that only support the v4l2 interface. And what's worse, the kernel will support your webcam and will correctly issue no error message; but GnomeMeeting will try to find the device and won't locate it without so much as a warning!

Hope they get more bugs sorted out before release. (5, Interesting)

pklong (323451) | more than 9 years ago | (#11951975)

Looking at the updates directory of core 3 there are gigs of updates in there. It didn't even install on my nVidia nForce system because of bugs in the SATA drivers in the 2.9 kernel. (It's fixed in 2.10 I believe.)

Installing the nVidia drivers (because shock horror I wanted 3D) froze then system on boot because of the rhgb red hat graphical boot thingy. The switch to udev caught me out here. Luckily I figured out what was happening and sorted it.

I also had weird sound corruption in some programs which I tracked down to arts. Turning the sound down in that sorted it but I can't find any kind of a config file, let alone a GUI application that sets a sound level which survives a reboot. I sorted it my adding an entry in rs.local.

Also why on earth don't they compile NTFS reading into the Kernel. (Captive NTFS would also be nice as an option...)

Sadly your average tech fiddler on the street would have given up with this pallava and installed Windows.

XP Installation went without a hitch and worked perfectly first time. It can even play MP3's out of the box ;)

So for all you Slashdotters out there who think a Linux install is easier than I Windows install, well it can be. Provided nothing goes wrong. Which is unlikely.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952066)

Err... I thought this was a test release? Test releases aren't traditionally known for their stability and ease of use.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952233)

Err... I thought this was a test release? Test releases aren't traditionally known for their stability and ease of use.

Read it again. He's telling us about his problems with core 3, which *is* released.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (2, Informative)

_randy_64 (457225) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952080)

Of course they will, that's why this is a test version. FC3 had (I think) three test releases before the final released version.

> Also why on earth don't they compile NTFS reading
> into the Kernel. (Captive NTFS would also be nice
> as an option...)

Just like with MP3 playing, I believe there are licensing/patent issues with NTFS that Fedora/RedHat just avoids by not distributing those functions.

> Sadly your average tech fiddler on the street
> would have given up with this pallava and
> installed Windows.

Test releases are really not for the "average tech fiddler on the street". If you're not ready to commit a system for testing purposes, then you/they really should stick with FC3 for now. A normal or finished user-based distro (e.g. SUSE, FC3, Mandrake..) would generally not have such problems with the install. FC4 will be the same way when it's done and not in testing.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (5, Informative)

davidkv (302725) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952081)

You can find answers to most of (all?) your problems here:
http://www.fedorafaq.org

Shipping NTFS and MP3 is encumbered with legal problems, that's why they're not included by default. Google can tell you that within seconds.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952195)

That doesn't match my experiences at all. Mandrake installation goes without a hitch and plays mp3s fine (I don't think it will encode without an external lame.so or something, but playing is no problem). Drivers were better than on windows (I thought XP had no SATA support at all?). And kmix (the default "sound mixer" program, like you get when you click the speaker in the system tray, just like in windows) restores sound levels at kde login, plus most distros will save them when you shut down and restore when you boot up.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (1)

codeguy007 (179016) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952223)

The worst thing about the XP install is you need a SATA driver floppy to install to the sata drive. Most manufacturers ship the drivers on CD. Considering Microsoft said the floppy should be in the 1998 Computer, why in the world do they still require one for installing in 2005.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (1)

pklong (323451) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952236)

I didn't need one. Mind you my windows install CD had service pack 2, maybe that make sa difference.

Re:Hope they get more bugs sorted out before relea (1)

pklong (323451) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952229)

Err, no the problem is with arts, quick search reveals (analog real-time synthesizer) not the sound system which works perfectly. arts seems to have it's own sound level.

The Big Question... (1, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952007)

The big question is, does it support MP3 out of the box (off the CD?). This was one of the major things that turned me away. I know it's easy to fix, but that isn't the point. It's 2005. They'd better have MP3 support.

Re:The Big Question... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952044)

That's hardly the big question now is it?

Frong Qwestion. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952093)

The big question is, why aren't you using vorbis instead?

Re:The Big Question... (1)

BenjyD (316700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952099)

Isn't the fact that it's 2005 in "the age of the software patent" the problem?

It is illegal to include (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952107)

And it being 2005 doesn't change that.

Re:The Big Question... (4, Informative)

k98sven (324383) | more than 9 years ago | (#11952135)

The big question is, does it support MP3 out of the box (off the CD?).

No, it does not, and will not as long as the patent is in force.

Red Hat would end up being liable to pay Fraunhofer licensing for RHEL, and possibly for FC4 too.

Are you going to pay for that license? No? Then quit bitching about Red Hat and put that energy towards the real problem here: Software patents.

Re:The Big Question... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952224)

It's 2005. They'd better have MP3 support.

Actually, the patents covering MP3 don't expire for at least another decade.

Please tell me why (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11952153)

I don't understand why they haven't make a major change to the taskbar (the task panel). With the release of GNome 2.10, I eagerly downloaded to be disappointed by see it almost the same.

The task panel is used very often by users. I has to allow users to use the mouse to resize it. It has to keep the icon the same (user preference on this), not to expand them. A dedicated area for open windows and folders' icons and a dedicated area for quicklaunch items. Yes, you can say it should work just like windows That's not to say it copies windows, but that's how I think most logical to the users.

So, why they haven't change this? Probably the most used item on a GUI desktop.
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

Loading...