Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 13th Sep 2007 22:29 UTC, submitted by Philipp Esselbach
Fedora Core Fedora 8 Test 2 (7.91) has been released with isos and trees for i386, x86_64, and ppc(64) and 3 live CDs (KDE, developer and Electronic Lab). Update: Preview of Fedora 8 here.
Order by: Score:
...
by Hiev on Thu 13th Sep 2007 23:53 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

* Fedora Developer Live (i686) - A Live image designed for software developers.


That's what Im looking for, thank you.

Reply Score: 3

Uhmm
by britbrian on Fri 14th Sep 2007 00:12 UTC
britbrian
Member since:
2005-07-06

not to nitpick, but there's four live cds including the Gnome version

Reply Score: 2

RE: Uhmm
by dark child on Fri 14th Sep 2007 00:54 UTC in reply to "Uhmm"
dark child Member since:
2005-12-09

Is that a problem? Its not so different from the many variations of the official Ubuntu distro.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Uhmm
by axel on Fri 14th Sep 2007 01:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Uhmm"
axel Member since:
2006-02-04

the blurb says 3 live cds, there are 4, hence why it was identified as nitpicking

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Uhmm
by dark child on Fri 14th Sep 2007 06:25 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Uhmm"
dark child Member since:
2005-12-09

Ok, I get it. ;)

Reply Score: 2

How does yum/rpm measure up?
by villagerman on Fri 14th Sep 2007 02:06 UTC
villagerman
Member since:
2007-01-14

Itś been years since I touched a RedHat/Fedora system. I would greatly appreciate if one informed me on how RPM/YUM measures up as compared to Debianīs apt. The last time I used Fedora, it had what was then known as rpm hell. Thank you.

Reply Score: 1

RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by GENIUS on Fri 14th Sep 2007 02:21 UTC in reply to "How does yum/rpm measure up?"
GENIUS Member since:
2007-09-10

What do you mean 'measure up' it is the same principle and who says apt-get is superior.

I have been using Red Hat since 6.0 release, and currently running FC7. I have not had any problems with rpm problems or any other issues. If you are trying to compare let me guess 'Ubuntu' since it is Debian based to Red Hat Enterprise releases (Fedora is the test bed) you got to be kidding me...

Installing software is still the same, and the argument/option is different. No different than someone running SuSE or Mandrake...

One other note Red Hat is the leader in the Enterprise and they are releasing the Global Desktop this month...

One more side note, I make a living off Red Hat (Admin) and I have my RHCT working on my RHCE...

Edited 2007-09-14 02:21

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by siride on Fri 14th Sep 2007 02:43 UTC in reply to "RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?"
siride Member since:
2006-01-02

I'd say RPM is superior to APT. The only people who get caught in "RPM hell" are those who think that 'rpm' is equivalent to 'apt-get'. Once you learn that 'yum' is equivalent to 'apt-get' (and more powerful), and that 'rpm' is more like 'dpkg' (but more powerful), and that you can deal with circular dependencies by, gasp, installing the packages all on the same command line (which I figured out in about 15 seconds on my own), you find that yum/rpm is much more fun than apt-get/dpkg. Having worked extensively with yum and rpm at work, including making my own RPMs, and then trying out Ubuntu a couple of times, I was severely disappointed with apt-get. The only good thing is the number of packages in the repositories. RPM is technically superior in almost every way.

Reply Score: 7

villagerman Member since:
2007-01-14

...and that you can deal with circular dependencies by, gasp, installing the packages all on the same command line (which I figured out in about 15 seconds on my own), you find that yum/rpm is much more fun than apt-get/dpkg...

You can always install any number of packages on one line using either apt-get or dpkg as well.

Reply Score: 3

joelito_pr Member since:
2005-07-07

What about the graphical add/remove applications(or equivalent) on Fedora, last time I used it, I couldn't remove any program because of dependency problems.

Reply Score: 2

Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Works just fine here. If you find any issues with it, file bug reports in http://bugzilla.redhat.com.

Reply Score: 2

gpierce Member since:
2005-07-07

Well, occasionally you do run into problems with having yum/pup removing critical packages that you need for a functional desktop, such as when I attempted to uninstall Evolution. I did not pay attention to all the other software that it wanted to remove and at the end I was left with a system that booted into console mode. The solution was simply typing 'yum groupinstall "GNOME Desktop Environment"' at the command line to recover the lost packages.

Reply Score: 2

Temcat Member since:
2005-10-18

I had much less trouble with DPKG and APT (on Ubuntu) than I did with RPM and APT-RPM (on AltLinux). RPM seemed more picky than DPKG about dependencies when it actually didn't need to, and APT-RPM worked noticeably slower than regular APT, at least on updating package lists.

Reply Score: 3

AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

"RPM seemed more picky than DPKG about dependencies when it actually didn't need to"

this has absolutely nothing to do with the package managers.

rpm and dpkg handle dependencies very simply. There's really nothing else they *could* do. The dependencies are specified in the packages themselves. If all dependencies are satisfied, rpm and dpkg install the package. If they're not, they stop and complain. That simple. No room for any differences.

In other words - what you're talking about has absolutely nothing to do with dpkg and rpm, and absolutely everything to do with Alt and Ubuntu. It's up to the *packagers* to specify the dependencies correctly. It has nothing to do with the apt or rpm formats themselves.

Reply Score: 2

l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

RPM is technically superior in almost every way.


Thing is, it takes a lot more to dismiss bad memories.

Reply Score: 3

RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by Soulbender on Fri 14th Sep 2007 03:23 UTC in reply to "How does yum/rpm measure up?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

For the end-user there's no noticeable difference between a system that uses deb and one that uses rpm.
Pirut, the fedora package manager, is not a patch on Synaptic though. Pirut/Pup is quite awful in so many ways and is easily my biggest gripe about Fedora right now.
That and that it doesnt support my Ralink card well.

Edited 2007-09-14 03:35

Reply Score: 3

apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

I haven't used yum in a while but last time I did yum was far slower than apt-get by a huge margin and it wasn't as good as apt-get at resolving dependencies. They must have worked on that. I will still stick with apt-get and deb packages because I have yet to have any issues with dependencies using any debian based distro, I can't really say the same for Fedora when I was using it, it used to be a huge hassle all the time and it was mostly because of yum and how it handled the same version of a library across different repos. Apt-get seems to resolve things better, imo, even with unsupported repos. I don't think I'll ever move from ubuntu but I am going to install Fedora on one my old Feisty harddrives (using gutsy) and get familiar with fedora again.

Reply Score: 3

RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by unoengborg on Fri 14th Sep 2007 05:01 UTC in reply to "How does yum/rpm measure up?"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

Very well, I would think. In later years, I think I have had much more .deb hell in Ubuntu and Debian, than I have had rpm hell in Fedora or CentOS.

The main problem with yum is, or rather have been, lack of speed. However, if that is what it takes to avoid .deb/rpm hell I'll gladly accept it. Lately, the speed of yum have improved a lot.

Reply Score: 2

RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by sbergman27 on Sat 15th Sep 2007 05:32 UTC in reply to "How does yum/rpm measure up?"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

RPM hell? You've been listening to too much uninformed Debian propaganda. It comes from the ancient times when Debian was the only distro that handled dependency resolution.

That said, apt is still faster. And the package availability is pretty amazing.

Aside from that, I'd take a RHEL/CentOS/Fedora system over a Debian-based system any day of the week.

Come on in. The water's fine. :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: How does yum/rpm measure up?
by JohnMG on Sun 16th Sep 2007 08:40 UTC in reply to "RE: How does yum/rpm measure up?"
JohnMG Member since:
2005-07-06

> Aside from that, I'd take a RHEL/CentOS/Fedora system
> over a Debian-based system any day of the week.

Could you please explain why?

In what situation would a RHEL/CentOS/Fedora system make your life easier than a Debian-based system? (For servers, I mean.)

Reply Score: 1

v rockmen1
by rockmen1 on Fri 14th Sep 2007 02:08 UTC
RE: rockmen1
by spikeb on Fri 14th Sep 2007 03:22 UTC in reply to "rockmen1"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18

kde 4 won't be out by the time fedora 8 is out.

Reply Score: 5

v RE[2]: rockmen1
by rockmen1 on Fri 14th Sep 2007 09:12 UTC in reply to "RE: rockmen1"
RE[3]: rockmen1
by pinky on Fri 14th Sep 2007 09:47 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: rockmen1"
pinky Member since:
2005-07-15

>KDE 4 will be out between FC7 and FC8

KDE4 will be out between FC8 and FC9 that's why it can't be in FC8 and will be in FC9.

Please check the timetable of both projects!

Reply Score: 6

Yawn, another RPM vs. DEB flamewar
by lindkvis on Fri 14th Sep 2007 10:14 UTC
lindkvis
Member since:
2006-11-21

RPMs and Debs are for all purposes that most people care about equally good. Yum and apt-get perform the same tasks with pretty much the same features. Although yum at least used to be quite a bit slower than apt-get. A problem which has mostly been fixed.

Both systems can end up with "RPM/Deb-hell" if not handled carefully, particularly with multiple repositories.

The only difference worth caring about has little to do with the technical differences of the system, and more to do with how good of a job the packagers do. Debian/Ubuntu has a massive advantage here, given the amount of good packages available to you.

Personally I think it is a mistake to care deeply which package system your Linux distribution uses. The overall gain by having every distribution use the same system is massively larger than the minor gains you may get by chosing a particular packaging system.

RPM/DEB? I simply don't care as long as the packages themselves are nicely and sanely done.

Reply Score: 3

netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

rpm/deb .. imho doesn't matter. What does matter though is the repos. Are there many mirrors? Are those repos on high available servers? Is the control within reach of the distros policies? etc..

As long as a user can simply issue "<fill in> install <package>" and all dependancies are met automagically itīs ok.

Reply Score: 3

Aaron1 Member since:
2006-01-19

The overall gain by having every distribution use the same system is massively larger than the minor gains you may get by choosing a particular packaging system.

I second that. There are too many package systems out there.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Yawn, another RPM vs. DEB flamewar
by sardaukar on Fri 14th Sep 2007 10:51 UTC
sardaukar
Member since:
2006-05-09

Amen to that - I don't get RPM hell a lot, but when I do I have the sense to know it's because I'm mixing repos. I tried using Ubuntu (I really did), but being a RH user since 5.x, I've been spoiled by _logical_ stuff like numbered runlevels (runlevel S, wtf?), Apache's user being "apache" and not www-data, and also cool frontends for basic stuff. Besides, I couldn't get the HAL daemon to start up on Ubuntu, or make changes to gnome-session contents (both known bugs, not yet fixed). Roll on Fedora 8!

Reply Score: 2

yum speed good now
by buff on Fri 14th Sep 2007 11:48 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12

I am using Fedora 8 Test 1 to write this and I find that Yum is much improved. It updates much faster now and you can also install a plugin for yum which allows you to only download changed files (deltas) which greatly decreases download time. The only major problem I had with the test was getting my Audigy SE sound card to work. I had to install the latest test packages of Alsa before sound would work. The new Pulse Audio sound server works well but I had to download a developer's build of Flash to get it to work with PA. The final test of Fedora 8 is also going to come with Compiz-Fusion. I don't think it is in test 2 yet.

Edited 2007-09-14 11:51

Reply Score: 2

cool
by REMF on Fri 14th Sep 2007 12:05 UTC
REMF
Member since:
2006-02-05

pulseaudio sounds interesting, wonder when suse will get it?

Reply Score: 1

Don't click that preview link!
by zizban on Fri 14th Sep 2007 13:05 UTC
zizban
Member since:
2005-07-06

The page it links too is 1/5 review and the rest being Flash pop ups and ads, ads, ads.

Reply Score: 3

Ultimatebadass Member since:
2006-01-08

If you're a firefox user AdblockPlus does the job nicely. With almost no configuration I got 2 small images and some ad text on that site ;)

Reply Score: 1

paackage format
by dwave on Fri 14th Sep 2007 13:53 UTC
dwave
Member since:
2006-09-19

Let's not get back to the package format discussions we had 10 years ago. I feel at home both on DEB-based and RPM-based Linux distributions. Everyone working on multiple flavors of Linux should already have found out that the packages itself are not creating "dependency hells" - it is the maintainers who do and differing packaging guidelines among Linux distributions or even among different repositories for one distribution. We you run into dependency hells on Fedora then it is probably because of mixing mutual exclusive repositories, i.e. livna and freshrpms.

And this review here is not even worth the click.

Reply Score: 3

RE: paackage format
by Finalzone on Fri 14th Sep 2007 19:54 UTC in reply to "paackage format"
Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

Speaking about livna and freshrpms repository,
the conflict between these two is officially over. They have recently merged into rpmfusion repository.

http://www.rpmfusion.org

Reply Score: 2

Fedora 999999999999999
by jyoungxxxx on Sat 15th Sep 2007 17:57 UTC
jyoungxxxx
Member since:
2007-01-11

Let me known when Fedora gets to distro 99999999999999 and I will consider looking at it!!!!!!!

..or better yet just go ahead and tell everybody they are beta testers, not somebody that is going to benefit from a good solid OS design.

Edited 2007-09-15 17:59

Reply Score: 0

RE: Fedora 999999999999999
by buff on Mon 17th Sep 2007 22:11 UTC in reply to "Fedora 999999999999999"
buff Member since:
2005-11-12

Let me known when Fedora gets to distro 99999999999999 and I will consider looking at it!!!!!!!

Pah-leeze... Fedora negativity is so cliched. I have been using version 8 since the first test to do all my grad school work on. I use Exaile to listen to MP3 radio streams while I'm typing up reports on Open Office. The installer correctly picked up my Nvidia 640 board, HP 6540 printer, all my flash and external USB drives and mounted my NTFS partition. Yum is faster than it has ever been. Damn, what more do you want for free?! Oh-yeah, and the latest icon sets and themes from Gnome look great on Fedora.

Edited 2007-09-17 22:13

Reply Score: 2

i know it may seem old But I did itttt
by anshu on Mon 17th Sep 2007 20:58 UTC
anshu
Member since:
2005-09-03

oh yes I tested it and it was massive fun.

http://linuxtruthiness.blogspot.com/2007/09/beta-testing-fedora-8-t...

(i know its old news for all of you but i couldn't resist telling it ;) )

Reply Score: 1