Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fedora 8 Released

CowboyNeal posted more than 6 years ago | from the hot-off-the-presses dept.

194

Cat in the Hat writes "Fedora 8 has been officially released. Ars Technica has a run-down of what's new in Fedora 8, including the PulseAudio sound daemon, Nodoka visual style, and a new authentication system. 'Another major change in Fedora 8 is the new PolicyKit authentication system that makes authority escalation more secure. Instead of providing root access to an entire program when it needs higher privileges, PolicyKit makes it possible to isolate individual operations that require higher privileges and put them into system services that can be accessed through D-Bus. Another advantage of PolicyKit is that it will give administrators more control over which users and programs have access to individual operations that use escalated privileges.'"

cancel ×

194 comments

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

FINALLY! (1, Troll)

heauxmeaux (869966) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288655)

Just kidding - who gives a shit?

Re:FINALLY! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289083)

This really brings back memories. Back in the day, I had red Hat (3-5) installed on a sparc "borrowed" from the computer lab (one of the perks of working there after hours and lax security). Joe, one of my coworkers, was ex military. He taught me a lot about security, and I've been an OpenBSD convert ever since he rooted my box. I've also been homosexual since he rooted my ass, but that's another story. Good times.

Re:FINALLY! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289401)

Also today big news happen. Cobyneal suck Eric Cartman balls! Big American balls!

Dang! I just got Gutsy Gibbon configured.... (1)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289707)

(Well, I'll be done once AT&T dialup in San Jose actually accepts my authentication credentials and I've checked that the wireless will pass traffic after associating with the office WiFi LAN...)

Re:Dang! I just got Gutsy Gibbon configured.... (0, Offtopic)

Ungrounded Lightning (62228) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289993)

If this posts I got office WiFi and SSH working...

So essentially (-1, Flamebait)

dedazo (737510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288695)

They copied a bunch of stuff Windows has had for years (policy) or just got (advanced audio).

I mean that's good and all, that increases pressure on Microsoft to innovate and whatnot. Also for Apple. But it's just funny that when Microsoft copies something they are "stealing" and "incapable of innovation", but when someone else does it (Linux, OS X) it's praise the lord and pas the popcorn.

Re:So essentially (1)

mrbluze (1034940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288751)

They copied a bunch of stuff Windows has had for years (policy) or just got (advanced audio).
Hard to say what is a logical progression and what is copying. I mean, AppGuard (Suse) is not much different from having policies, and that has been around for a while now. Improving audio as a default is just a good idea, period. What disappoints me is that every time I choose a Linux OS to install on my systems, another brand comes up with some cool tricks that I wish I had. I just installed Ubuntu on my macbook, and now I'm tempted to go and try Fedora again after years of not touching it.

Re:So essentially (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288923)

I just installed Ubuntu on my macbook, and now I'm tempted to go and try Fedora again after years of not touching it.

You don't need to reinstall. Just use a virtualization engine like vmware or VirtualBox.

Re:So essentially (1)

UncleTogie (1004853) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289257)

What disappoints me is that every time I choose a Linux OS to install on my systems, another brand comes up with some cool tricks that I wish I had.

So why not dynamically resize your drive partition{s} to include some free space with GParted [wikipedia.org] and then dual-boot? [wikipedia.org]

You could also tri-boot with two partitions for stable "keepers" and a third as a "scratch install" space, just for testing... 'Bout 20GB oughta be plenty.

I'm not suggesting that with ALL your systems, but on at least one, and on as many different hardware combinations as possible...

Re:So essentially (1)

smash (1351) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290871)

Alternatively, you could... you know... install the relevant applications to provide the missing features? Like back in the stone-age (oh, i dunno, say 4 years ago or more?)

I'm having problems with GNOME. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288987)

I installed it earlier today, but I'm having all sorts of problems with GNOME. Right after I first started using it, a bunch of different programs starting dumping core. I don't think it's my PC, since it was working fine with Ubuntu for the past 8 months. I switched to KDE, and all of the programs there work. None have crashed. So I'm thinking that the version of GNOME bundled with FC8 is just unstable.

Re:I'm having problems with GNOME. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289961)

I tried ubuntu and it killed my hard drive
Course i dont have any documentation, bug reports or proof to back up my claims, i will even post as an anonymous cowards cause its obvious im a troll. Strange thing is though our posts are the same you'll get modded up and i'll be modded down.

Re:I'm having problems with GNOME. (3, Informative)

kripkenstein (913150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21291409)

I installed it earlier today, but I'm having all sorts of problems with GNOME. Right after I first started using it, a bunch of different programs starting dumping core. I don't think it's my PC, since it was working fine with Ubuntu for the past 8 months. I switched to KDE, and all of the programs there work. None have crashed. So I'm thinking that the version of GNOME bundled with FC8 is just unstable.
GNOME is the default on Fedora, so that would be a catastrophe for them. Before we jump to conclusions, we should check one thing: did you verify the checksums on your CD after you burned it? Perhaps there were errors; this can mess up an installation.

Troll (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289261)


If you would like to compare and contrast various sound daemons in Linux, including Pulse Audio and Jack with the sound in OSX, and the Virus prone OS, please do so.

If you would like to explain how the security of the Virus prone OS is better, please do so. Please tell us how it's better at preventing Viruses, and explain how SELinux, PolicyKit or whatever is a poor copy of the obviously more secure near monopoly OS. Please tell us how it was invented in a vacuum and was not an idea that already existed.

I look forward to your reply.

Re:So essentially (2, Informative)

iccaros (811041) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289289)

I know, don't feed the .. well you know..

this is not a copy of any Microsoft or Apple function. This is closer to Trusted Solaris and ppriv command. that allows users to be given access to services and at what level they are usable, IE the OS is at ADMIN LOW because all user will be able to read that security domain but not write to it.. (read down/ write up) and all logs are published to admin high because most users can write to that level but not read it (so you can't find your actions in a log and remove them, but your programs can write to the log)

in this case though its just a gui interface (not a new function) to the SELinux modules to set privileges at a much greater granularity. example we can give your application root privileges to write to the CDR but only user privileges on every other action, or replace with any OS function including limiting which memory locations it can access, this way the escalation can not be used on any other service/thread or action.

This is apart of the Mandatory access Controls, that along with Role based authentication (root is not a user but a role) gives Linux the ability to be certified as a PL3 and higher system, While Windows in any current state or Mac OS or that matter, would never be able to achieve this accreditation.

Re:So essentially (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289375)

Yeah, it's never a copy of anything. It's all pure innovation.

Re:So essentially (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289425)

They copied a bunch of stuff Windows has had for years (policy) or just got (advanced audio).
Exactly. And when Ubuntu switched off of pulseaudio (then known as polypaudio) back to ALSA a few years ago, they reverse-copied. You should have seen the time space vacuum gravitate all sorts of the popularity!

If you really want to feel better, go to the go to the nearest Time Machine thread thread ( http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/16/0656212 [slashdot.org] ) and complain to kingdom come about how time machine is a copy of Windows.

Re:So essentially (1)

jd (1658) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290227)

Since when has Windows had Mandatory Access Controls? ACLs, yes, but MACs? Although Linux has them, I'm not sure if Fedora 8 has MAC on memory, packets, etc, but Linux in general does. Microsoft does not and from Vista's retraction of security measures due to breaking software (as, indeed, happened with XP Service Pack 2), it seems clear that Microsoft will not introduce security. This is NOT, repeat NOT, the fault of Microsoft (for the most part) but the fault of software vendors who have utilized holes to the point where those holes CANNOT be fixed - the cost of fixing all of the consequential bugs is prohibitive.

Re:So essentially (1)

jd (1658) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290305)

Oh, as for advanced audio, Windows does indeed have fairly sophisticated sound. I am impressed by some of the features of it and by the performance of some of the 5.1 and 7.1 drivers. However, remote sound (useful on remote desktops) isn't as good under Windows as it is under Linux. The Linux kernel can be made hard real-time, which Windows' kernel cannot, which should also improve the quality.

Another one? (2, Insightful)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288699)

Two distros so released so close to one another? You'd almost think that they were working toge...
Oh. They are, aren't they? ;)

Re:Another one? (3, Informative)

hdparm (575302) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288811)

RHEL 5.1 (if you mean this as one of two related distros) is a RHEL 5 re-packed to include all bug/security fixes to date, so if you need to do a new install, there's no need to pull hundreds of updates from RHN.

Fedora 8 isn't related too much to RHEL (RHEL 5 was built on Fedora Core 6). I use only Fedora and Red Hat and I'm probably biased. However, F8 includes some neat stuff that warrants checking up by Linux users in general. It works great, too.

Re:Another one? (1)

Eric Smith (4379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289429)

Fedora 8 isn't related too much to RHEL (RHEL 5 was built on Fedora Core 6).
RHEL 6 will most likely be built on a future Fedora release, such as Fedora 9 or Fedora 10. In some sense Fedora 8 can serve as a preview of some of what's to come in RHEL.

Re:Another one? (1)

batkiwi (137781) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290343)

Can you OFFICIALLY update a server (no X11, no physical access) yet?

FC1->2, 2->3, 3->4 (I gave up then) the only supported way to upgrade was to boot to the CD, which is a no-go for those of us with hosted dedicated servers.

Re:Another one? (yum upgrade...) (2, Informative)

DusterBar (881355) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290645)

I have use the yum upgrade method for quite some time. You may wish to check out the Fedora yum upgrade faq [fedoraproject.org] at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/YumUpgradeFaq [fedoraproject.org] - there is also a non-official guide to using yum to upgrade a number of RedHat distributions [brandonhutchinson.com] at http://www.brandonhutchinson.com/Upgrading_Red_Hat_Linux_with_yum.html [brandonhutchinson.com]

You may want to make sure you read some of the gotchas as if you have packages that are not from the Fedora Project and they are not upgraded or compatible with the newer version you are upgrading to you may need to delete them.

Note also that there are some difficulties in the x84_64 CPU architecture as more things become native 64-bit and thus some conflicts with older releases may happen...

Re:Another one? (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290791)

Can you OFFICIALLY update a server (no X11, no physical access) yet?
Regardless of whether you can OFICIALLY do it, can you ACTUALLY do it? Both of my favorite distros (gentoo and debian) sport this feature... but does that mean the system will actually update dozens of packages without breaking something? Of course not. Based on my personal experience, people who cavalierly "emerge -U world" or "apt-get dist-upgrade" are nuts.

Re:Another one? (0, Offtopic)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288861)

Yea, and you can tell. ALL redhat-hosted websites are hosed, and that makes it really hard for me to go and install cygwin. Does nobody have that damn setup.exe mirrored? arg!

Re:Another one? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289005)

Yea, and you can tell. ALL redhat-hosted websites are hosed, and that makes it really hard for me to go and install cygwin. Does nobody have that damn setup.exe mirrored? arg!
Umm, Corel Cache? [nyud.net] .

Waiting for Fedora 9 (1, Informative)

EmbeddedJanitor (597831) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288723)

Not enough reasosns to move from Fedora 7, IMHO, but to each their own. Maybe I'll wait for Fedora 9.

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288897)

Not enough reasosns to move from Fedora 7, IMHO, but to each their own. Maybe I'll wait for Fedora 9.
Yeah, I kind of think about it that way too. Though I'm still on FC6, so maybe this is my upgrade. I ended up on even releases resisting the transition to Fedora from RH9, but I always prefered the odd ones before (I was fond of RH7.1 and RH9 and hated 7.0, 7.2 and 8.0). Anyway, I prefer to give them a few months to finish working out the kinks, so maybe I'll go for Fedora 8 in early '08...

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289143)

Fedora 7 is horribly unstable, and I stuck with Fedora Core 6. 8 seems to be a lot more stable, and I am burning an install disc as I type this. 9 is probably going to be stable as well, and is predicted to be the basis for RHEL 6. If I were you, I would leave 7 in the dust, it is too badly botched...

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (3, Informative)

Eric Smith (4379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289489)

Fedora 7 is horribly unstable,
I've been running Fedora 7 on five machines, including one publicly-visible web and mail server, and have seen no stability issues at all, other than minor problems with one update kernel which were fixed in less than 24 hours. Of course, I'm probably using different parts of F7 than those with which you have had trouble. What areas caused problems for you? And weren't they fixed in F7 updates?

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

Rayban (13436) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289871)

I've had lots of USB trouble myself (autosuspend cmd line doesn't help, sadly) with F7. I get hard process lockups on lsusb that are unkillable. It's got something to do with my Dell LCD's hub, but it's easier just not to use it than diagnose it. :) It's possible that it's because my machine is x86_64 and the support is still a little rusty though.

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290861)

Dell sucks.

I worked doing help desk for a few companies and Dells were always the oddball. The products we made required newer directx features and Dell never updates their drivers. Infact an nvidia based dell laptop can not use a nvidia driver because dell loves to modify it to save $.05 on each notebook because they are cheap.

Dell also doesn't want to invest money on older hardware drivers and prefer you to buy a new dell.

Its likely they modded the usb hardware where its no longer in spec iso compliant. All the other notebook makers do not modify hardware that way and a generic nvidia or ati driver will always work.

Strange

I tried the live cd (1)

xjlm (1073928) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289185)

Attractive, but it seems to think anyone using it to install needs their hand held every inch of the way. I loved Fedora Core 2, 3, and 4, but they pretty much chased me away by 5 through their refusal to accept those of us who use Nvidia products and those who want to play the DVDs we purchase. There are many other distros out there a lot friendlier to install and use. Fedora is like a testing ground for Red Hat, so they really don't care about folks like me.

Re:I tried the live cd (4, Insightful)

The Cisco Kid (31490) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289335)

You are blaming Fedora for something that isnt their fault.

1. DeVD's - RH is US-based. It would be illegal for them to include DeCSS libraries. You can get them from atrpms. Other US-based distributions arent going to have it either.

2. nvidia - actually nvidia is at fault here, they should either release specs or source for their drivers, so that they can be supported properly by Xorg. (As many other video card chipsets are) And as before, you can still add these yourself, either from atrpms or directly from nvidia.

Re:I tried the live cd (2, Informative)

Eric Smith (4379) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289551)

actually nvidia is at fault here, they should either release specs or source for their drivers, so that they can be supported properly by Xorg
As ATI has started doing with the R500 and R600 series. So far the technical docs they've released basically only cover the frame buffer, but they've stated that the 3D docs will be forthcoming. (2D acceleration is done using the 3D engine.)

For now, it looks like the 3D graphics hardware with the best open source support is the Intel GMA-X3000 integrated graphics in the G965 and GM965 chipsets. The performance is lower than the bleeding-edge ATI and Nvidia parts, but it's adequate for most purposes.

Re:I tried the live cd (1)

mikael (484) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290181)

I just burnt the Fedora Core 8 install DVD. It seems the nvidia driver is detected automatically. It got as far as installing the X-server, but then freaked me out by complaining that *ALL* my partitions needed to be reformatted because I had a "loop partition" on my hard disk drive. I did a search for some similar comments and this seems to be something to do with the boot loader. Maybe I will upgrade to a larger hard disk drive before I install FC8.

I also tried running Ubuntu - that didn't get really far except to display a funny stripy square in the top left corner, and a checkerboard pattern of orange lines on my screen. This happened at the same time as it tried to play a trumpet sound off the DVD.

Knoppix is still my favourite LiveCD so far.

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (4, Insightful)

Pros_n_Cons (535669) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289851)

not enough reasons to move
did you read the notes?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/ReleaseSummary#head-4f0c6fbce5ef70b1b3c850fbd9dd725ddfd48a42 [fedoraproject.org]
as someone else wrote
* custom spins
* fedora 8 on a usb key
* pulseaudio
* codecbuddy
* yum improvements (yes it's fast)
* packagemanagement improvements (change repos and more)
* gui for firewall
* online desktop
* the whole fedoraproject.org website and associated projects
* Network Manager suppose to have seamless capabilities
* New Syslog demon
* seamless bluetooth integration and laptop improvments
I can go on. I'm very excited about this release you kidding?

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290813)

The codec situation and the lack of cleartype fonts suck.

With Ubuntu you can use getAutomatix to install them. Is there anything similiar with Fedora?

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290859)

I agree, after reading some of the release info I got very interested in FC8. Specifically due to PulseAudio. I do not know why but ALSA has *never* liked me (since the first time I tried Linux back around 1997) in any distribution I have tried (Mandrake, Red Hat, Debian, Ubuntu). Some applications always end the randomly blocking audio and whatnot. I hope the guy at PulseAudio get Linux sound RIGHT once and for all.

About this GUI for firewall, i have an enquiry. Some weeks ago I was playing with ubuntu trying to make some apply bandwidth limitation (QoS) to a specific application. Specifically to the ubuntu updater which sucks all my 250Kbps when it is upgrading the distribution. After some time in google I learnt that it is nothing trivial and you must configure some iptables files to achieve it.

It would be great if you could bring up the system monitor (gnome) and, similarly to the way you see the CPU used by the processes you could see the bandwidth used and similarly to how you can re-nice some process you could allocate a maximum bandwidth just by right clicking and choose the appropriate option.

Now, that will be something that not even Windows or OSX have... and it will be really cool IMO. It is also very feasible as the technology to do it currently exists in Linux doesn't it?

Re:Waiting for Fedora 9 (1)

zerocool^ (112121) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290899)


I don't think it has GCC 4.2 yet. this [vt.edu] shows gcc 4.1. I've had a few people I support asking for it; it'd be nice if a major distro came out with it.

~Wx

finer grained priv levels (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288747)

anyone old enough to remember VAX/VMS?

talk about the old coming back in style again. but giving too coarse a set of 'root privs' has always been inferior in unix compared to the privs level VMS had.

otoh, once you start going fine-grained, its a whole order of magnitude more 'management' and debugging. so, the benefit won't be entirely for free. but it will be worth it. the 'all or nothing' model has had a good run. but it is tired and in need of some modernization, even if taking hints from 30 year old OS's.

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289051)

>anyone old enough to remember VAX/VMS?

Ok, where's DCL for Linux?

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289639)

Ok, where's DCL for Linux?

there is one! or used to be. I once cared - but then, well, I got better ;)

I loved vms and dcl - but it had no future once DEC became compaq. worse when HP got that.

it had its run, but I'd use a unix shell on a unix box and not hack around with dcl wannabees. I'm not sure the philosophies would really match that well, dcl and unix...

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289157)

anyone old enough to remember VAX/VMS?

Hell I'm old enough to remember punch-cards.

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

Clueless Moron (548336) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289159)

To be fair here, it has never been an 'all or nothing' model. Don't forget setgid. For example, most mail related programs run setgid with the corresponding programs setgid rather than setuid.

One reason for the simplified security model in Unix was exactly because the more complicated system of Multics (with ACLs etc) tended to lead to poorer security since the security aspects were spread out all over the filesystem and ACLs instead of just being entirely in the code. Or to put it another way, security auditing becomes a lot harder.

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

J053 (673094) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289595)

anyone old enough to remember VAX/VMS?
Remember it? I still have to support it! (VAX/VMS 5.4H on VAXstation 4090)

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289829)

anyone old enough to remember VAX/VMS?

I remember it. I liked the feature that allows you to "stack" directories like those anatomy transparencies in encyclopedias. You could layer the directories like this: safety:appupdates:apps:osupdates:os. The os files go at the bottom. Any updates go in osupdates. That way, you can keep the original file if there are any problems. You can just delete the update and the original file takes over. Ditto with apps and appsupdate. The safety layer prevents any writes to the directory stack from affecting any files in the lower layers. You could have some users using one set of apps, and others using a different set of apps by changing the "stack".

Re:finer grained priv levels (1)

scottv67 (731709) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289971)

I remember it. I liked the feature that allows you to "stack" directories like those anatomy transparencies in encyclopedias. You could layer the directories like this: safety:appupdates:apps:osupdates:os. The os files go at the bottom. Any updates go in osupdates. That way, you can keep the original file if there are any problems. You can just delete the update and the original file takes over. Ditto with apps and appsupdate. The safety layer prevents any writes to the directory stack from affecting any files in the lower layers. You could have some users using one set of apps, and others using a different set of apps by changing the "stack".

What the hell are you rambling about? I spent quite a few years working with VMS on VAX and then VMS on Alpha. I don't remember seeing anything like what you described.

All Hail Choice! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288769)

Another Linux distro gets released that:

* Fixes some things that were broken in previous releases

* Breaks some things that were working in previous releases

* Places files and directories in a slightly but in no way better arrangement throughout the filesystem

* Handles some hardware better than other distros

* Handles different hardware worse than other distros

* Uses a different bandaid(package management system) than other distros for installing software

Gee, putting together an operating system that works on all levels as a consumer product is a lot of work. Just think of how good it could be if you could actually PAY people to put in the effort to make things right?

Re:All Hail Choice! (4, Funny)

hdparm (575302) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288849)

Just think of how good it could be if you could actually PAY people to put in the effort to make things right?

You mean something like MS does?

Re:All Hail Choice! (2, Informative)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288895)

Just think of how good it could be if you could actually PAY people to put in the effort to make things right?
mmm? A lot of distros do pay developers. I don't know about Fedora but Ubuntu for example has people on payroll to fix bugs and get things working.

Re:All Hail Choice! (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289171)

Red Hat has many employees paid to work on Fedora. The changes in artwork from release to release are an indication.

Re:All Hail Choice! (3, Informative)

rayvd (155635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289249)

Red Hat pays many of their developers / admins to work full time or part time on the Fedora project. They have a vested interest after all -- much of Fedora eventually makes its way into RHEL.

Re:All Hail Choice! (1, Funny)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288929)

It would become like Vista. Isn't that great? :D

Re:All Hail Choice! (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289135)

Just think of how good it could be if you could actually PAY people to put in the effort to make things right?


      Uhh, no thanks. I've already done that and guess what, the software was STILL crap, but I got a huge impression of a misplaced sense of authority and entitlement from the publisher...

Re:All Hail Choice! (1)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289939)

Gee, putting together an operating system that works on all levels as a consumer product is a lot of work. Just think of how good it could be if you could actually PAY people to put in the effort to make things right?


Umm... Why can't you PAY people to work on Fedora? (Or, any other Linux distribution, for that matter.) Nothing stopping you or anybody else. What you can't do is pay arbitrary people to work on proprietary software. That was a really weak, weak troll, IMHO.

Back on Track (1)

clear_thought_05 (915350) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288821)

I remember reading somewhere today that this release puts Fedora "back on track for predictability". I wonder if that bodes well for their perception?

In any event anyone who has followed along with the "Fedora Philosophy" knows that they always had the objective of releasing fairly quickly and all the while trying the latest and greatest technologies, however rough they are. You don't have to be a genius to know where the newest technologies end up all polished: RHEL.

I tried out the RC3 release a week ago and felt it a slight notable improvement over Fedora 7 in terms of polish and performance although that's just a brief evaluation. Here are some links (most I just pulled off the last link):

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/ReleaseSummary [fedoraproject.org]
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f8/ [fedoraproject.org]
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/install-guide/ [fedoraproject.org]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bugs/F8Common [fedoraproject.org]
http://www.mjmwired.net/resources/mjm-fedora-f8.html [mjmwired.net]

Oh wait ... looks like fedoraproject site is overwhelmed!

Re:Back on Track (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288909)

You can't really performance-test RC against the release. RCs usually have lot of extra overhead caused by debugging flags turned on.

Re:Back on Track (1)

clear_thought_05 (915350) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288939)

"You can't really performance-test RC against the release. RCs usually have lot of extra overhead caused by debugging flags turned on."

I'm not so sure, I read on the fedora-devel mailing list that the RC3 release would be pretty much bit-for-bit what would be in the final release. I think there were only some minor bug fixes between the RC3 and final. If you were talking about the Fedora-Test releases, then you're right for sure.

Re:Back on Track (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21288943)

Wait, seriously?!

RC means Release Candidate. In most sane systems, this means that it's the build they intend to be the final build. It's first build with all the debugging flags turned off, which is what differentiates it from a beta.

Once a Release Candidate has few enough bugs left open against it, then it becomes the final build. In a sane system, there is no difference between the final release and the release candidate immediately before it.

Otherwise it's not really a release candidate, it's a beta.

Re:Back on Track (2, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289119)

Once a Release Candidate has few enough bugs left open against it, then it becomes the final build.

      In Microsoft language this is called "Service Pack 3".

Better late than never. (-1, Troll)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21288879)

Finer-grained privileges! Interprocess communication! Finally, Linux gets the stuff that's been missing from Unix since 1980 or so.

Maybe someday we'll get real exclusive use on files.

Re:Better late than never. (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289111)

Those are called access control lists. They have been around for a long time.

http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/ [www.suse.de]

Note the date on the document.

POSIX Access Control Lists on Linux

This document was generated using the LaTeX2HTML translator Version 2002-2-1 (1.70)

Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, Nikos Drakos, Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
Copyright © 1997, 1998, 1999, Ross Moore, Mathematics Department, Macquarie University, Sydney.

Re:Better late than never. (1)

bob.appleyard (1030756) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289127)

Obviously System V IPC has been available for years.

Re:Better late than never. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289393)

1980? What is your comparison? DOS, CPM, or BSD?

Fedora 8 release summary and announcements (4, Informative)

spevack (210449) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289255)

There are a few "official" links that people might find useful:

Release Summary -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/ReleaseSummary [fedoraproject.org]

Release Notes -- http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/f8/en_US/ [fedoraproject.org]

Fedora Project Leader's release announcement -- http://lwn.net/Articles/257644/ [lwn.net]

And of course the downloads at http://torrent.fedoraproject.org/ [fedoraproject.org]

Re:Fedora 8 release summary and announcements (1)

DukeLinux (644551) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289377)

I am running it right now...well actually the Live distribution. My DVD iso has not yet finished. Not bad. I have been running Fedora 5 for awhile and it is time to get with program and update. Maybe over Thanksgiving.

GNOME, KDE, and other custom spins (3, Informative)

spevack (210449) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289347)

For folks who are downloading, http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora [fedoraproject.org] is the best starting point to the GNOME, KDE, and other spins.

Fedora 8 running on USB keys (4, Informative)

spevack (210449) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289365)

Red Hat Magazine posted a HOWTO explaining Fedora 8 booting from a USB key [redhatmagazine.com] .

It is one of the more interesting features in Fedora -- users can build their own customized spin of the distro, and then run it on a USB key. Totally custom and portable.

Yet ANOTHER sound server? (4, Insightful)

Burz (138833) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289439)

This is getting ridiculous.

And Linux audio STILL has a problem with blocking IO! So now I get to have networked audio in a few PulseAudio-aware apps, while my softphone won't ring and my calendar alarm is mute because some web page in the background uses Flash.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (4, Informative)

Rayban (13436) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289453)

PulseAudio emulates all the other systems with LD_PRELOAD libs so that they are all PulseAudio-aware. This means that your 1998 softphone that uses exclusive open() on /dev/dsp will function, with the magical policy of PulseAudio.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (2, Informative)

Burz (138833) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289665)

No, the problem is that ALSA also exhibits audio blocking by default, too. Many applications use ALSA directly, and some of those block audio even when nothing at all is trying to use OSS.

Adding another userspace soundserver will just compound the confusion that already exists, while leaving the largest architectural flaw in place.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

Rayban (13436) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289779)

You're supposed to configure the ALSA plugin for PulseAudio so that ALSA apps get PulseAudio automagically:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PulseAudio [archlinux.org]

PulseAudio is designed to fit into your audio stack all over the place. Since they'd never get any adoption if everything had to be recoded, they took the smart route and added input/output plugins and emulation systems for every system that exists already.

It's a smart move. Once developers realize that PulsaAudio is on *every* modern system, apps will start being coded against the PulseAudio stack instead of using /dev/dsp, ALSA, ESD or some other option.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (2, Interesting)

Spikeles (972972) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290731)

Once developers realize that PulsaAudio is on *every* modern system
Yes, but isn't DSP supposed to be on *every* modern system? Then wasn't ESD.. no.. i'm sure it was ALSA.. no wait, wasn't it aRTS?

"Magic" of LD_PRELOAD?!?!?! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21290439)

What about statically-linked apps?

What if someone calls _open() instead of open()?

What if someone decides to call their sound device something other than /dev/dsp?

What about programs that need to be setuid and/or setgid?

What about 64-bit machines that can run both 32- and 64-bit apps?

Relying on LD_PRELOAD is a hack and a kludge.

Or maybe my 2007 Skype client? (1)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | more than 6 years ago | (#21291773)

"This means that your 1998 softphone that uses exclusive open() on /dev/dsp will function".

Maybe my 2007 Skype client might work with PulseAudio? Cause it uses /dev/dsp directly as well, AFAICT, and it was just built a couple months ago. Stop assuming only ancient programs use this technique - modern ones do too.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (2, Insightful)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289525)

I assume you are talking about some programs using OSS, which actually has little to do with PulseAudio. With Linux boxes you are generally best off searching out at least Alsa when possible. OSS...is just about as bad as esd.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

Burz (138833) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289691)

No I am talking about ALSA.

And anyway, if the presence of OSS-using programs blocks the newer architecture, then nothing's been fixed. You can't expect users to learn these details about apps and juggle them to keep their soundcard accessible.

I have a system right in front of me with NO /dev/dsp or other OSS apps on it, and the audio still blocks. You still need a soundcard with mutli-channel hardware in order for the audio to seem non-blocking.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

Rayban (13436) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289809)

Read the PulseAudio docs on padsp, the PulseAudio /dev/dsp emulation layer. It's designed to transparently intercept all /dev/dsp calls and route them through PulseAudio itself.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289885)

OSS blocking audio is a classic Linux problem. Though nowadays most programs have switched over to alsa anyway including Flash etc. If you have no dsp, then OSS is not your problem. You would get an error dialog every time an OSS program tried to access dsp. I have never had a problem with audio blocking on alsa, but I have heard of something like it happening. Polypaudio might be your eventual savior. Polypaudio was made to be a drop in replacement for the very very old enlightenment sound daemon. esd was used so that multiple sound sources could be played at the same time on OSS. You might want to research alsa dmix in your local distributions forums. Good luck.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21290071)

Polypaudio might be your eventual savior. Polypaudio was made to be a drop in replacement for the very very old enlightenment sound daemon. esd was used so that multiple sound sources could be played at the same time on OSS. You might want to research alsa dmix in your local distributions forums. Good luck.
Original poster obviously didn't look at all into what PulseAudio actually does, because the one thing PulseAudio does really well compared to everything that came before it is unify all these various sound interfaces under one very modern system.

Incidentally, PulseAudio is PolypAudio. :) (Renamed, of course.) I've been using it on my Debian box for a while instead of ESD (for which it is a very nice replacement). One of my favorite things is that if I hold down a key to make my terminal beep (like the back arrow), the sound mixing is low latency--it plays immediately, and creates this awful sound. But it's what it should do--which makes it so cool. :)

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290747)

Those were the exact reasons why Ubuntu tried setting PulseAudio to default a year or two ago. But then it was so buggy they were forced to return to just Alsa. Let's hope that Fedora doesn't suffer the same fate.

You're very lucky if movies didn't go out of sync with esd when playing movies. It's latency had a tendency to be horrible. While PulseAudio fixes this, I can't help but wonder if it is as needed as it once was. ALSA has matured and few programs only offer OSS output anymore. All of my installed programs use ALSA for output and can play sound effects etc without cutting each other out.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21290067)

Yes well the man who writes it, Linux Torovaldis, is extrememly busy all the time. That's the problem with communism.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

doti (966971) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290119)

I agree.

This should be handled by ALSA, on the audio driver level.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (1)

Mad Merlin (837387) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290785)

It is actually. ALSA's dmix allows multiple programs to use the sound card concurrently and transparently, regardless of hardware support. Dmix has been on by default for at least a year or two now (since ALSA 1.0.8, IIRC), and you could enable if you wanted it before that.

what about jackd? (1)

pikine (771084) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290463)

I've been Googling around, and I've yet to find a convincing reason to use PulseAudio over jackd. Why reinvent the wheel? Jackd has network transparency (see NetJack [sf.net] ). People say jackd is for professional audio, and PulseAudio is for desktop user. I don't see a reason why jackd cannot be made for desktop users. After all, CoreAudio framework on Mac OS X works for both desktop and professional audio. I've also used jackd just to listen to music or watch movies. What are the GNOME people thinking?

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (5, Interesting)

Spy Hunter (317220) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290541)

Thankfully, it does appear that PulseAudio is the One True sound server that we can all finally agree on. It emulates esd, OSS, and ALSA, so legacy apps like Flash and your smartphone work. It supports hotplug of audio devices, including networked ones (using Zeroconf even). It supports synchronized output between multiple devices, even when those devices use different sampling rates or have out-of-sync clocks (it resamples automatically). It has a zero-copy low latency architecture, taking advantage of the latest high resolution timer and real-time scheduling capabilities in new Linux kernels (when available), and it supports latency measurement for sound/video sync even when high latency is unavoidable (such as over a network). It has a modern user interface that provides per-application volume sliders like Windows Vista, and allows on-the-fly routing of audio to devices, including "saving" audio streams to another device if the device they are using is unplugged.

The guys behind PulseAudio really "get it". They even decided to drop their typically-awful open-source project name "PolypAudio" in favor of the infinitely better "PulseAudio", for wider acceptance. You've got to give them points for that; the GIMP could learn a thing or two from them.

Re:Yet ANOTHER sound server? (5, Interesting)

Spy Hunter (317220) | more than 6 years ago | (#21290723)

Oh, and I forgot to mention that PulseAudio has aspirations to become "Compiz for audio", providing earcandy effects such as surround-sound positioning for on-screen events (so sounds from a window on the left of the screen come from the left speaker, etc) and muffled sound from background windows (so the Flash ad in Firefox's background tab doesn't blast your eardrums and the new-mail notification doesn't sound over the movie you're watching full-screen).

Old news (0, Redundant)

Jello B. (950817) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289451)

Downloaded it, installed it, messed around with it trying to get it to work, and then gave up and installed Fedora 7 again, all before the Slashdot article hit the front page.

Fast torrent this time (4, Interesting)

schwaang (667808) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289577)

For past Fedora releases I've had slow torrent downloads (and I'm not even on Comcast). This time I downloaded at nearly full bore the whole time. I don't know why that is, but thank you seeds.

Mwo??? Available at Facebook? (4, Funny)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289625)

http://mirror.facebook.com/fedora/linux/releases/ [facebook.com]

I wonder how long ballmer will be throwing chairs because one of his favored investments is giving away/make freely available an operating system he'd like to suffocate.

He is probably going to have a cozy little chat with one young Mr. Mark Zuckerberg. But, he'll start out easy. Won't throw REAL chairs in his office, but maybe lawn or bean-bags first.

Mark: (seeing chairs break the speed of light for the first time...) DUDE! Aurora Boralis, up close!

what's up with updates (1)

recharged95 (782975) | more than 6 years ago | (#21289769)

installed it and cannot update from the mirrors. I can read the development repo at least.

So far between the two, I like openSUSE 10.3 better (more recent kernel). feels more polished. Haven't try Gusty yet since I can never get the DVD writer to work in 7.04... I figure it maybe more polished than 10.3, but I happy for now.

"Desktop effects could not be enabled" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21289897)

Ubuntu could do it on the same (nVidia) hardware. Yes I put in the propritary drivers (and recompiled them when the kernel was updated). Also Ubuntu could boot from PATA drives in a mixed PATA/SATA system. Fedora 8 doesn't want to do that.

ho80 (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21290389)

simple solutioN ofone single Puny Jesus Up The

GMP 4.2.1 (1)

Myria (562655) | more than 6 years ago | (#21291213)

Finally, you won't have to install a custom package to get decent cryptography performance in Fedora. It took them a long time to get away from 4.1.4.

PulseAdio and Jack Audacity (1)

blind monkey 3 (773904) | more than 6 years ago | (#21291743)

Hi, Just wondering if PulseAudio plays nicely with Audacity these days, I have a pc set up for Audio manipulation/editing/music composition stuff that I was going to upgrade (setting up a 64 bit box at last!), thought I might have a look at the offerings of "the dark side" (rpm based systems - I use Debian) oops....is that term a Microsoft TM?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>