Linked by AdamW on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:10 UTC
Fedora Core Fedora 16 Alpha is released today, featuring GNOME 3.1.4 with a unified input indicator for keyboard layouts and input methods, KDE 4.7, GRUB 2 on new installations (with GPT disk labels) and several other major changes. You can download it now. Remember to read the important information in the release notes and common bugs page.
Order by: Score:
v And yes,
by Yoko_T on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:27 UTC
RE: And yes,
by SlackerJack on Wed 24th Aug 2011 17:43 UTC in reply to "And yes,"
SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

For me I don't care what Linus said so take it with a pinch of salt, it's just his opinion, not everyone else's.

You have a brain of your own? Use it.

Reply Score: 3

v copycats
by SK8T on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:29 UTC
RE: copycats
by Finalzone on Wed 24th Aug 2011 00:31 UTC in reply to "copycats"
Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

this is going to gnome 3.2 features...

is it really necessary to copy everything right after apple released it? This "online account panel".

It was introduced in 10.7 Lion, now it's in Gnome 3.2 and it's nearby a 1:1 copy... I mean - come on... this is microsofts job!

I dont find this very creative of the gnome team...

(compare the "Gnome online account panel" with Lion's "Accounts" Panel in System preferences and u will see)

Apple does a lot of copycats too: OSX Lion took some Gnome 3.0 features to polish them. AFAIK, KDE already had that online account concept before OSX. All applications have copied each other allowing diversity and competition. Time to move on.

Reply Score: 11

RE: copycats
by Delgarde on Wed 24th Aug 2011 01:42 UTC in reply to "copycats"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

is it really necessary to copy everything right after apple released it? This "online account panel".

It was introduced in 10.7 Lion, now it's in Gnome 3.2 and it's nearby a 1:1 copy...


It could easily be the other way around - Lion hasn't been out that long, and the Gnome devs have been talking about the Online Accounts Panel for a long time now (in the context of how to better handle Contacts).

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: copycats
by chekr on Wed 24th Aug 2011 11:52 UTC in reply to "RE: copycats"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

Maemo has accounts as a "panel"...predates the OS X implementation by years

Edited 2011-08-24 11:53 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Macs
by korpenkraxar on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:29 UTC
korpenkraxar
Member since:
2005-09-10

Nice to see improvements on GPT disks and hopefully EFI booting. Running Linux on a Mac without rEFIt and BIOS emulation is incredibly difficult atm.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Macs
by AdamW on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:54 UTC in reply to "Macs"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Note that we specifically exempt Macs from the release requirement that EFI booting must work, on the basis that Fedora's EFI guy considers the Mac EFI implementation unutterably broken. We do a best effort for Macs, but...it's not guaranteed.

Booting on sane EFI implementations ought to work, and actually has since F15. Well, modulo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=731529 .

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Macs
by zlynx on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 23:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Macs"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

I have EFI boot working on my Samsung Series 9.

It's a little messed up. There aren't any tools to control the EFI boot variables, for example, so the EFI boot menu has no timeout and I have to hit Enter before it'll boot.

And the GRUB display is waaaay off center. It's like GRUB thinks the framebuffer is offset by 800 pixels or so.

But it's usable.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Macs
by AdamW on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Macs"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

there's efibootmgr, does that not do what you need?

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Macs
by zlynx on Wed 24th Aug 2011 17:08 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Macs"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

Huh. Thanks.

It might be nice if there was some visibility for boot options in the Gnome System Settings.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Macs
by Thomas2005 on Wed 24th Aug 2011 13:26 UTC in reply to "RE: Macs"
Thomas2005 Member since:
2005-11-07

Note that we specifically exempt Macs from the release requirement that EFI booting must work, on the basis that Fedora's EFI guy considers the Mac EFI implementation unutterably broken. We do a best effort for Macs, but...it's not guaranteed.

Does Apple not know how to write proper EFI booting code, or are they just doing what they need to do to get OS X booted?

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Macs
by Neolander on Wed 24th Aug 2011 15:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Macs"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

They should not need to tweak the EFI firmware beyond the frontiers of the specification for that. Unless it's a kind of DRM that's used to prevent installation of OSX on PCs which have a standard EFI firmware, in which case that's still pretty messed up.

Edited 2011-08-24 15:44 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Macs
by korpenkraxar on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Macs"
korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

In any case, they do not exactly help getting anything other than OS X to run on a Mac...

Reply Score: 3

v Ugly Font Rendering
by smoerk on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:46 UTC
RE: Ugly Font Rendering
by AdamW on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 22:55 UTC in reply to "Ugly Font Rendering"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

For the fiftieth time: font rendering is an extremely subjective area and what you consider 'ugly', others may well consider nice. It's really not worth getting that worked up about.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by Flatland_Spider on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 23:11 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

That's true, but the Liberation fonts, without any other changes, look better then the default.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by AdamW on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:16 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Again, subjective. If you think a different font looks better, change the font - it really ain't that hard.

(Personally I use Cantarell for everything. I even put it on my phone...)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by righard on Tue 23rd Aug 2011 23:34 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
righard Member since:
2007-12-26

That's very true. Using me as an example, I love the fonts in Fedora, I always try to emulate it in other Arch since I tried Fedora once.

Also, many people love the fonts in Windows, I loath them.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by smoerk on Wed 24th Aug 2011 00:48 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
smoerk Member since:
2009-07-10

There are subjective preferences and there is bad rendering. Ubuntu, OSX and Windows 7 render the fonts differently, but with good quality. The font rendering I see on my screen with Fedora 16 alpha is just wrong. This has nothing to do with taste, it's objectively inferior to Ubuntu. Maybe it's a problem with the alpha version, I haven't compared it with previous Fedora releases.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by Rahul on Wed 24th Aug 2011 01:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Objectively inferior? Even in this thread, atleast one person has pointed out that they like how Fedora fonts look. You are discounting that entirely.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by phoenix on Wed 24th Aug 2011 18:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

Sooo ... where is your objective proof that the font rendering is so horrible?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by allanregistos on Wed 24th Aug 2011 08:47 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

For the fiftieth time: font rendering is an extremely subjective area and what you consider 'ugly', others may well consider nice. It's really not worth getting that worked up about.

I highly doubt that it is _extremely_ subjective area.
The font rendering is important(consider moving from XP to Fedora) and you will see the font difference.

What people missed about font rendering is not about BEAUTY where subjectivity applies, as you've said. It is about how the system properly displays the font without overlapping characters, the system must handle this properly so that it is easier for the user to read regardless of the beauty, and Linux desktop failed to address this. Yes the default font is readable enough, but it is still fall short of what fonts should be.

Try to replace your fonts via appearance and look at the characters on your desktop especially terminal, and you will see the ugly fonts.

Ubuntu at least have tried to address this, and I like their ubuntu fonts more than the liberation fonts or anything Fedora provides.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by lucas_maximus on Wed 24th Aug 2011 21:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

it is a well known problem with the auto hinter ... there is even a RPM repo for fixing it.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ugly Font Rendering
by Neolander on Wed 24th Aug 2011 07:25 UTC in reply to "Ugly Font Rendering"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Here's an interesting read about "ugly" font rendering.

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html

Basically, there is no proper font rendering on a screen, only compromises. People who are used to the Apple approach (visual correctness) will think it looks better, people who are used to the Microsoft approach (crispness and readability) will think it looks better, etc...

GNOME 2 allowed you to choose which rendering algorithm you prefer, which was a nice touch even though the dialog was confusingly worded. Don't know if the feature is still there in GNOME 3

Edited 2011-08-24 07:26 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by _txf_ on Wed 24th Aug 2011 09:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Don't know if the feature is still there in GNOME 3


Sums up Gnome 3 very nicely...

Reply Score: 7

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by Neolander on Wed 24th Aug 2011 09:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Yep. KDE 4.0 all over again from that point of view.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by FreeGamer on Wed 24th Aug 2011 15:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
FreeGamer Member since:
2007-04-13

OMFG MAJOR NEW VERSION IS NOT THE FINISHED ARTICLE.

Quite why people expect a massive platform overhaul to be a totally perfected release is beyond me.

Don't like Gnome3? Keep using Gnome2. There's plenty of distributions out there.

I've not upgraded since Fedora14 because It Works. If you want the latest and greatest then you have to take the rough with the smooth. If you want something that people spent years knocking the kinks out of then use something that has had a few years to mature.

This whole whiney mess of unsatisfied users was exactly the same when Gnome 2.0 came out, KDE 3.0 came out, and KDE 4.0 came out. It was the same with XP's first release, the same with most major software updates and their first releases.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Ugly Font Rendering
by dragossh on Wed 24th Aug 2011 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering"
dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

I develop a product for several years. It gets better with every new version. Then I release version 3. Do you expect it to have everything the previous version had, and more?

If it's an overhaul, name it GNOME New-Worse-Experimental version, and you should develop it alongside your stable version until you get it on par with that.

Edited 2011-08-24 18:06 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Ugly Font Rendering
by gilboa on Wed 24th Aug 2011 07:29 UTC in reply to "Ugly Font Rendering"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

... Not sure that this is the issue your hitting, but there's an issue with auto-hinting on some display / GPU configuration that makes Fedora 15 fonts look horrible on some machines (I hit it on my Laptop, but not on my workstations... go figure).

The solution is quite simple:
Create a file name 99-autohinter-only.conf in /etc/fonts/conf.d.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE fontconfig SYSTEM "fonts.dtd">
<fontconfig>
<match target="font">
<edit name="autohint" mode="assign">
<bool>true</bool>
</edit>
</match>
</fontconfig>


Not sure if it works on F16 (I've yet to try it).

- Gilboa

Edited 2011-08-24 07:30 UTC

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by orestes on Wed 24th Aug 2011 13:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Cue Fred Sanford like heart attack claims whenever someone mentions text files and simple in the same sentence...

I've definitely seen the weirdness you're talking about though. On my system Fedora's got some of the best font rendering out of box of any OS I've seen. On my coworker's laptop it looks godawful by default until one applies the hinting change.

As for the people whining about the base font itself, you could, you know, take the two clicks or so and change it to one you prefer. It's not like we're in the dark old days of hand configuring X11 with Type 1 fonts

Oh, and the font hinting settings are accessible through Gnome-Tweak-Tool. Should be in the F16 repos if it's not installed by default

Edited 2011-08-24 13:33 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering
by AdamW on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Ugly Font Rendering"
AdamW Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, what that does is disable the bytecode interpreter and use autohinting only. It's a wonderful example of the subjectivity of font rendering, in fact. Here's the history.

The freetype autohinter is a workaround for the fact that bytecode interpretation (reading special instructions that come with a font which tell you how to hint it, essentially) was patented. Fedora is serious about known patents, so Fedora prior to F15 disabled freetype's bytecode interpreter and used autohinting only.

One of the #1 'fix Fedora's ugly font rendering' "tips" for Fedora 14 and earlier was to install a modified freetype package which enabled the bytecode interpreter.

Since F15 the patent on the bytecode interpreter is dead, so Fedora's freetype ships with the bytecode interpreter enabled. Autohinting is only used for fonts which don't have a bytecode. Now, one of the #1 'fix Fedora's ugly font rendering' "tips" is how to configure freetype to use the autohinter all the time - i.e. the precise opposite of the old "tip".

Need any more proof that this is an utterly subjective area? ;)

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Ugly Font Rendering
by gilboa on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Ugly Font Rendering"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, what that does is disable the bytecode interpreter and use autohinting only. It's a wonderful example of the subjectivity of font rendering, in fact. Here's the history.


Adam,

Being a long time Fedora user, I'm well aware of byte-code/auto-hinter story.
However, not sure if its DPI related or nVidia card related, when I hit this issue (as I said, I only faced this issue on ~50% of my Fedora 15 machines) there was nothing subjective about the fonts being incorrectly rendered.
E.g. On the machines that exhibit this issue, the vertical line in "L" in certain sizes is simply aliased out making L look like it underscore ("_").

Sadly enough, as I saw multiple posts about this issue back when I started using F15, I didn't file a bug report coupled with pictures.
I'm in the process of converting large number of F14 machines to F15; if one of them triggers this bug, I'll file a bug report w/ pictures.

- Gilboa

Reply Score: 2

RE: Ugly Font Rendering
by korpenkraxar on Wed 24th Aug 2011 16:08 UTC in reply to "Ugly Font Rendering"
korpenkraxar Member since:
2005-09-10

Install the infinality patches and you will have the best font rendering in the industry. http://www.infinality.net/blog/

Reply Score: 3

RE: Ugly Font Rendering
by lucas_maximus on Wed 24th Aug 2011 21:39 UTC in reply to "Ugly Font Rendering"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

You will need the infinatlity RPMS to fix it.

http://www.infinality.net/fedora/linux/

unfortunately Fedora 16 is not supported yet (still being alpha) ... but this should fix font rendering for Fedora.

Reply Score: 2

F15 and F16
by Jason Bourne on Wed 24th Aug 2011 20:08 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

I tried F16 last night and it would crash on me right after login. The workaround was to create a new user with password and login with that.

Well, now what do I do with this GNOME Shell... nothing has changed, or nothing changed has been actually put on this release, as far as "in your face" is concerned.

The issue about rendering, as far as I remember is that Fedora didn't use a bytecode that Ubuntu was using because patents, and now that code has got its patent expired. So I'm not sure if they're using or not. What I can tell is that Cantrell is a bad choice for a font. Replacing it for Android Sans, the looks get much better, not ideal though. I'm a fan of Ubuntu font. Unfortunately, this is the last Ubuntu version I will be using (11.04).

F15 shouldn't have deployed GNOME Shell so early. Perhaps in 2 years. But that is Red Hat Linux, isn't it. Unity, well I will never use it at all...

I feel so orphaned by these distros...

Reply Score: 2

RE: F15 and F16
by fretinator on Wed 24th Aug 2011 20:39 UTC in reply to "F15 and F16"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I think you will find Linux Mint to be just right for you. Give it a shot. I also abandoned Unity and Gnome 3.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: F15 and F16
by Jason Bourne on Wed 24th Aug 2011 23:35 UTC in reply to "RE: F15 and F16"
Jason Bourne Member since:
2007-06-02

I think there's something wrong with Mint. It doesn't come with any cool theme. It's all green and grey. The wallpapers, all green themed. I think this is kinda annoying. The radical way. Not to mention that it inherits Ubuntu desktop bugs, or better GNOME 2 desktop bugs, like renaming a file in Nautilus in listview mode (it selects and renames the extension too).

Maybe next Mint release things will change. Perhaps someone will make the GNOME 3 fallback better and try to approach as many as features GNOME 2 had, without the bugs as well. XFCE looks like 1980... KDE is usable, but well, not really nice when you can't get it to fly on a decent graphics performance!

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: F15 and F16
by fretinator on Wed 24th Aug 2011 23:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: F15 and F16"
fretinator Member since:
2005-07-06

I think there's something wrong with Mint. It doesn't come with any cool theme. It's all green and grey. The wallpapers, all green themed..

I guess beauty is in they eye of the beholder, but I find Mint's appearance very simple and elegant - almost soothing. Of course, if you want to steer clear of Ubuntu bugs, you could go straight Debian - although aesthetically it will appear VERY dreary to you I fear. For a flashier Debian, you could go with Warren's Mepis. The point is, there are many choices out there. Heck, give Suse or Mandriva a try. As for themes in general, switch them if you don't like the default.

Reply Score: 3

RE: F15 and F16
by zlynx on Wed 24th Aug 2011 23:37 UTC in reply to "F15 and F16"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20

Yep. Price you pay for using a cutting edge distro.

You could be using CentOS 6 or Scientific Linux for a Fedora-like but stable system. They're really not bad.

I also have a fondness for Gentoo Linux, but that may be more work than you want to take on.

Reply Score: 2

About firefox window can't be closed.
by jefro on Wed 24th Aug 2011 20:25 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

That and an odd dhcp deal. Have to make a second nic to get the first to work.

Reply Score: 1

no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by fast_rizwaan on Thu 25th Aug 2011 12:50 UTC
fast_rizwaan
Member since:
2010-09-01

I burn a f16 live cd and when I installed it, wtf, no 3d with nouveau on nvidia 9800gt?

live-cd even won't work with 3d, bah.

Come on fedora... it's disappointing.

Reply Score: 1

RE: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by Hiev on Thu 25th Aug 2011 14:18 UTC in reply to "no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

I wasn't able to try it eather, I got this error in both of my laptops.

http://imagebin.org/169603

Reply Score: 2

RE: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by orestes on Thu 25th Aug 2011 17:03 UTC in reply to "no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

It is an alpha, system eating gremlins are to be anticipated. if it does it in betas and RCs then we can start being disappointed

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by fast_rizwaan on Thu 25th Aug 2011 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
fast_rizwaan Member since:
2010-09-01

>It is an alpha, system eating gremlins are to be anticipated. if it does it in betas and RCs then we can start being disappointed

>It is a Alpha release. Have you filed a bug report?

So does alpha means no testing whatsoever on the most popular GPUs (nvidia, ati, intel) before releasing?

At least before releasing the alpha, shouldn't the devs try booting the live-cd /live-usb with some well-known hardwares and drivers?

Is this what being a user means? Filing bugs even for the obvious absolute untested releases? And strangely, this 3d crash in nouveau/nvidia bug is not mentioned in Known issues. Which should not have been there if they tested just by booting with the shiny new release.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_16_Alpha_release_notes#Known_I...

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F16_bugs

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by Rahul on Thu 25th Aug 2011 20:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

You do realize that we don't have all the different hardware? We test on our own systems and I don't have a Nvidia system for instance and 3D is Nouveau is very much specific to the hardware in question.

Since it is not a known issue, it is not in that list. If you file a bug report, the developer can track it down and fix it. If you rather complain here, feel free to.

The assertion that it can be found by basic testing is factually incorrect since this test releases went through several test and releases candidates and noone has reported the bug apparently. If you follow Fedora test list, this would be obvious and you can find the list of releases at

https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/

Edited 2011-08-25 20:21 UTC

Reply Score: 1

fast_rizwaan Member since:
2010-09-01

You do realize that we don't have all the different hardware? We test on our own systems and I don't have a Nvidia system for instance and 3D is Nouveau is very much specific to the hardware in question.

I can not believe that no fedora developer has nvidia display card? Nouveau is much sponsored by redhat/fedora. As most L-users know, to have good 3d support nvidia/ati should be used in linux.

Since it is not a known issue, it is not in that list. If you file a bug report, the developer can track it down and fix it. If you rather complain here, feel free to.

What I am complaining is, the lack of basic "boot-testing" up to the full desktop loading, with one of the popular display cards (GPUs), before releasing the alpha or so.


The assertion that it can be found by basic testing is factually incorrect since this test releases went through several test and releases candidates and noone has reported the bug apparently. If you follow Fedora test list, this would be obvious and you can find the list of releases at

https://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/

[/q]

Appreciate that, but as a new user to fedora, and to check out gnome 3.1.4, when I ran live-cd, I was welcomed with a crash, on a standard nvidia gpu, which is pretty much common in linux desktop machines and very well supported by nouveau and mesa.

I removed redhat from my system when redhat (was it redhat 8?) stopped mp3, libdvdcss, etc. support, and switched to slackware, then to frugalware then to chakra and finally to archlinux.

I'm afraid, the live-cd crash disappointed me and even after installing it on the disk, I got no 3d by installing nouveau drivers which has discouraged me from going deeper into fedora 16.

Reply Score: 0

RE[5]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by Rahul on Fri 26th Aug 2011 01:14 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

I didn't say no developer had it but the ones that tested it didn't obviously didn't find any issues. Remember that driver issues tend to be very hardware specific. Your *specific* chipset (not any Nvidia one) has a issue apparently.

You assume that we didn't do any bootup testing but obviously we did and it was all done transparently as you could verify yourself by looking at Fedora test list. For your reference

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_16_Test_Results

It would taken about the same time to report a bug as it took to post your reply here. So, let me ask you again to report it and hope you do that, this time.

Edited 2011-08-26 01:18 UTC

Reply Score: 1

fast_rizwaan Member since:
2010-09-01

I didn't say no developer had it but the ones that tested it didn't obviously didn't find any issues. Remember that driver issues tend to be very hardware specific. Your *specific* chipset (not any Nvidia one) has a issue apparently.

You assume that we didn't do any bootup testing but obviously we did and it was all done transparently as you could verify yourself by looking at Fedora test list. For your reference

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_16_Test_Results

It would taken about the same time to report a bug as it took to post your reply here. So, let me ask you again to report it and hope you do that, this time.


Ok, there already exists a bug with F15 where normal-graphics mode crashes on live-cd, which is the same issue with F16

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=534141
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704998
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708004

So, it's a nouveau driver bug in fedora 15. when an already existing bug in f15 is not fixed , how can F16 can boot properly? In f16 gnome-shell handles 3d crashes nicely, that's why it shows "Sorry there is some problem", unlike f15.

I just wonder why these unresolved bug is not mentioned in known-issues, then as "some nvidia gpus lack 3d support"?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by Rahul on Fri 26th Aug 2011 01:48 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

Not sure anyone tested this specific chipset for Fedora 16 Alpha but apparently not. I have added this to the common issues list based on your feedback.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F16_bugs#GNOME_Shell_crashes_w...

I recommend you update the bug report with feedback that the problem occurs on Fedora 16 alpha.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by orestes on Thu 25th Aug 2011 22:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

It's what being an alpha user means yes. By choosing to run an alpha you generally accept that you're the one *doing* the front line testing. There's any number of places that regressions can occur during the prep of a codebase for creating a test release, anywhre from upstream itself to the tools that build the isos. That's why there are alphas in the first place, to find and work out the kinks.

Reply Score: 2

fast_rizwaan Member since:
2010-09-01

It's what being an alpha user means yes. By choosing to run an alpha you generally accept that you're the one *doing* the front line testing. There's any number of places that regressions can occur during the prep of a codebase for creating a test release, anywhre from upstream itself to the tools that build the isos. That's why there are alphas in the first place, to find and work out the kinks.

by being a user means, and by choosing to run an alpha means, I should be getting atleast a fallback desktop and not a repeated "We are sorry gnome-shell crashed" on a live-cd to be called a user.

Reply Score: 1

RE: no 3d with nvidia 9800gt
by Rahul on Thu 25th Aug 2011 17:05 UTC in reply to "no 3d with nvidia 9800gt"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

It is a Alpha release. Have you filed a bug report?

Reply Score: 1

Eric Raymond days...
by Jason Bourne on Thu 25th Aug 2011 18:04 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

I remember when this was all over the net, ER abandoning Fedora and his loyalty towards the distro. His criticism were very valid, although many of them on the verge of irony.

You know when they say: "Well, it's that time of the year again!" - on Fedora I would say, this is just another Eric Raymond moment happening. I can't understand why some Fedora releases are consistent and others are so broken. Oh well, i never liked the name anyway.

Reply Score: 2

Bug reports?
by Jason Bourne on Fri 26th Aug 2011 01:54 UTC
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

you have to agree... most bug reports, devs usually laugh at you...

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bug reports?
by Rahul on Fri 26th Aug 2011 02:01 UTC in reply to "Bug reports?"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06

You are clearly exaggerating. It is *extremely* unlikely that any developer would laugh at you for filing bug reports. In thousands of bug reports I have looked at at on a regular basis, there has been a few disagreements but in general, issues get resolved or we look for more information to try and resolve the issue.

Reply Score: 1