Fedora Core 4 Test 1 is now available, more info here.
Post a Comment
.. of 404's and too many users in my class.. :-D guess i'll wait a week or so.. :-D
Find a mirror (i'm d/l @ 700+ K/s)
or join a torrent. (also pulling that too)
Have they fixed all their security bugs yet? I wouldn't be surprised if not...
Well what do you know, it is a beta test of beta software (j/k). Hope all goes well in the Fedora Camp.
~Alan
Downloading the DVD image right now I'm definitely anxious to burn this and attempt to install it.
wow, if it's being built with gcc4 it should be a lot faster!
There is so much cool activity going on in the Linux space right now... I am delighted and amazed!
> Have they fixed all their security bugs yet?
A Debian testing/unstable user.
waiting for FC4, i installed ubuntu and never looked back.
its everything fedora should be, and only one ISO to burn.
what bothered me about fedora?
- too many yum repos to deal with (dag, freshrpms, extras, etc etc)
- packages from different repos conflicting
- too many disks in the distro - normally this is not an issue but they want you to upgrade between versions using anaconda, requiring you to get the disks.
- regarding above: broken upgrade process. why should i have to burn disks for each release to upgrade?
- proliferation of upgrade services - apt, yum, up2date...yes yum and up2date pretty much cover the same toolchain, but still, no vision.
- periodic bad releases. see FC2.
I agree with some of the things you mentioned. However the thing that is keeping me with fedora over ubuntu is that they offer supported updates. The kernel update allowed HAL to work for me, which it did not with ubuntu. It is very nice to have the latest and greatest while ubuntu only has this in their development release.
>> Yet you keep coming trolling on this topic
thats funny since i just made up this ID this morning.
ubuntu's way of handling multilib isn't the best atm.
Fedora is much better for 64 bit OS/box imho.
>> Yet you keep coming trolling on this topic
thats funny since i just made up this ID this morning.
oh and you replies were oh-so-insightful. how many intelligently diesgned systems required four CDs? gentoo? no. freebsd? no. ubuntu? no. and you telling me that putting SElinux and KDE in the distro requires all of these CDs...wrong! its called network install. yes its nice they put it all on CD for joe blow in timbuk2 who does not have net access, but they make EVERYONE burn the CDs!
it is not an intelligently designed distro. They know it! Look at the devel list traffic, there is much gnashing of teeth about unloading packages. I am not just picking on Fedora, Mandrake and Suse and the rest of the "stack of CDs" distros are equally crapful.
So download the 1st cd, burn, install minimum ~650MB and:
yum install <name>
yum groupinstall <category>
Not to terrible.
you shouldn't have to burn ANY cds to upgrade an existing stable OS.
come on FreeBSD allowed full net updates and builds seven years ago. many other linux distros don't have this requirement.
you should not have to burn a CD to do a VERSION UPGRADE.
Some points to correct:
1.- too many yum repos to deal with (dag, freshrpms, extras, etc etc)
dag, freshrpms and other are currently merging into rpmforge. Extras repository is now Fedora Core repository
2.{i}- too many disks in the distro - normally this is not an issue but they want you to upgrade between versions using anaconda, requiring you to get the disks.[/i]
You can choose to not upgrades. Do you know you can use a single CD to do a HTTP/FTP installation? http://fedora.redhat.com/download/
3.- regarding above: broken upgrade process. why should i have to burn disks for each release to upgrade?
You can use yum to upgrade. However be in mind that Fedora Core goal is to get a bleeding edge technology. For example, Hal technology(like anon listed), Logical Volume Management 2.
4.[i]- proliferation of upgrade services - apt, yum, up2date...yes yum and up2date pretty much cover the same toolchain, but still, no vision.
Yum is the default package manager. up2date which use yum is meant to update, that's its assignement. That proliferation gives users to choose their favorite package managers. ELse you will a lot of complain that Fedora Core cannot use apt.
5.- periodic bad releases. see FC2.
If you talk about dual boot problem, that was related to kernel 2.6 that also affected other distros like Mandrake 10.0.
thats funny since i just made up this ID this morning.
I apologize.
oh, updates, yeah there is this program called "yum" i've used it to upgrade versions and so have other people that know what there talking about.
Lets mv on to the fact you like ubuntu, which is fine. It's a decent distro and I would put it 2nd place for me. But your comments/questions are off and you don't really know what your talking about, so why don't you just drop the FUD?
A reminder concerning about the number of CDs, Ubuntu does not include development packages nor KDE. You talk about a false issue.
Is it me or did they not update the RELEASE-NOTES-en file?
I will check it out when it goes final. I am interested in how GCC 4 is going to change how the distro runs.
free -m gives me this after a boot and login(Gnome)
-/+ buffers/cache: 259 242
(I have 512 Mb ram installed).With Fedora 3
it that last value is about 320
So what's spending this extra memory ? :-(
I wouldn't touch Fedora in the workplace with a ten foot pole. Updating systems on a daily basis, Upgrading systems on a yearly basis and having unstable patches deployed on servers that bring down servivces , or worse, the entire server are just too much. However, for home use, it is the ultimate distro. It is extremely stable, easy to upgrade, easy to mantain, pretty fast, and bleeding edge. Problems do pop up, but those are easily fixable (as long as it is just my machine and not an entire company of machines) It is an extremely fun distro to use as a home server, home workstation, or a personal desktop system.
Your RAM isnt being used, its been cached.
Its a good thing. 
"its everything fedora should be, and only one ISO to burn.
what bothered me about fedora?
- too many yum repos to deal with (dag, freshrpms, extras, etc etc)
- packages from different repos conflicting "
You can say the same for Ubuntu. Ubuntu is only on once ISO but you effectively have to download more ISOs just to get a full system. You can use other repos with Ubuntu and screw it up.
No, the first line of free shows memory including caches. But the second is what he's talking about, which takes buffers/caches out of the used column and into the free column.
Yea I love RH/Fedora and have since 5.?. Just thought I ought to speak up!
Are there ABI changes from 3.4 to 4.0? They don't mention any ABI changes here, but I thought I'd make sure.
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html
Rock! They finally support ppc if even in only a beta stage. Still that's awesome. I've been waiting for this for a while now because I've never been all that happy with YDL. 
I think it's only fair to use it for at least a week before passing judgement. But so far still prefering Ubuntu. I guess non-geeks users like me who wants a desktop OS better stick to Ubuntu.
Anyhow, I'll post again in a week to see if I manage to find what settings I should change to make it faster.
But this is just a test version. The final version will be a lot faster that this right?
> if it's being built with gcc4 it should be a lot faster!
Not true, gcc4 just compiles faster doesn't make your compiled code run faster!
> if it's being built with gcc4 it should be a lot faster!
Not true, gcc4 just compiles faster doesn't make your compiled code run faster!
Wrong:
GCC is an *optimizing* compiler (most of them are), which means it can change the the sequence of your code in-order to (vastly!) improve performance.
I'd suggest you do some reading (try man gcc, Optimization Options) before making such a non-sense comment.
(Oh... You start here: http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/changes.html)
Gilboa
First GCC 4.0 distro ! Great. I love to code only for optimization magic ( got some hardware, modify algorithms, use cool -O3, waving hands and - same hardware run >> 2X faster). That is cool.
I'm sorry but Ubuntu is horrible. I tried to give it another shot, but nothing worked. For example, if you try to get multimedia working (mp3, wmv, avi, mpeg, dvd for example) you might as well forget about it. The updates constantly crash my hardware acceleration, and it is very far from stable.
I'd say getting multimedia to work in Fedora is more of a hazzle.
Another problem with Ubuntu is that its based on the Debian package system, which is extremely primitive and should be destroyed. Source based packages will never push linux into the mainstream market.
Eh? What has APT to do with source based package systems to do? You think it's a wierd twist of fate that most distors today that have a Internet aware package mangement system use APT?
Use ubuntu mean :
- no KDE
- no SeLinux
- no gcc-4
- no decent gcj
- no eclipse
- no lvm/raid install
- no ACL
- no dir_index with ext3
- no resize online
- no utf8
- no xen
- etc
Ubuntu is not Fedora.
fyi: to do a minimal install you need cd 1 AND cd 3
Use Fedora mean
:: Longer Installer
:: No cool repos to match that of Ubuntu/Debian
:: Excessive Video RAM Hogging
:: Bloated
:: Mplayer just doesn't work for me 
:: Messed up mounting of removable devices
On the other hand
:: Good sleeping , hibernating
As far as it has been stated, there are no ABI changes between 3.4.x and 4.0.
Since when was Debian a source based distro. It is binary. Not that source based distros are bad...I currently use Gentoo (though I do like Ubuntu...my kids use it)and I think it is the most simple and logical distro yet with a package manager that can't break (in my experience only). Too many newbies post generalization like this that are incorrect.
Does anyone know which CD's are required for a standard desktop on an x86_64 machine. I don't want to waste bandwidth and download any unnecessary .iso images.
>>fyi: to do a minimal install you need cd 1 AND cd 3
sorry my mistake: you only need cd1 if you install the standard - english version
I was asked for cd3 because I did a german installation
It sounds like evryone has made up thier mind already ..... Good grief. Will someone install it and give some feedback.
For the record I use Ubuntu and Fedora and each has their strengths and weaknesses.
Its all about the comfort factor knuckleheads.
I like Fedora a lot too. I previously used Mandrake 9.0 and I hated the way it was 'trying' to do everything automatically for me. I found Fedora required a little extra setup but I like all the Python based admin utilities that it comes with. I ditched both KDE and Gnome and mostly use XFCE4.2 now.
I look forward to using FC4 which promises to be even faster than FC3. I will probably wait until a stable version comes out since I am kind of a chicken and like my stable workstation to remain stable!
Use Fedora mean
:: Longer Installer
yeah
:: No cool repos to match that of Ubuntu/Debian
Your opinion, whats a "cool" repo anyway. Between extra's and Dag I have only needed to compile like 2 apps. The rest came from yum.
:: Excessive Video RAM Hogging
Again, Your opinion
:: Bloated
Again, your opinion. Offering packages doesn't mean you must install them.
:: Mplayer just doesn't work for me
Your opinion, mplayer works for me and a million other people.
:: Messed up mounting of removable devices
I can mount removable devices.
Hi Folks,
I burnt the boot disk 6Mb and installed it straight from Web. I would like to commend Redhat on Ironig a few issues out like using the "nv" driver you no longer have a garbled Terminal Screen. This is my Favourite you dont have Multiple Control Panel type entries in Start Menu. The boot process is definately improved.
However python is broken as a result yum up2date and even the firstboot screen crapped out. I tried installing the python libraries which solved the problem somewhat however If I try to update my computer It shows 178 new updates and craps out at the end throwing lib errors.
Overall I think FC4 would be a hit since a lot a problems have been adderssed.
JUST FYI
AMD64 zv5260us 512RAM 80G DVD+RW
"how many intelligently diesgned systems required four CDs? gentoo? no. freebsd? no. ubuntu? no."
Gentoo and FreeBSD have waaaay more than four CDs worth of packages, and you can buy unofficial multi-CD versions of both from the cheap-CD distributors. Just because they both choose to emphasise network installation (which you can do equally well on Fedora, SuSE, MDK and every other big multi-CD distro) doesn't mean they're 'intelligently designed' or less bloated. It means they have a different target market.
Ubuntu is a special case; it's a pure desktop distro with a fairly small selection of software. Not to bash Ubuntu, I think it's a fine distro, but what's the first thing half of its users do after installing it? Set up a universe repository and install a bunch more packages...
All the minimal install i've done only require one cd?
minimal = chooseing just that option and install, did you click anything else?
I couldn't get many distros to even boot on this nightmare of a laptop
I dont know what the Fedora folks do but fonts looks pretty and their ATI driver offers a much better substitute than the proprietory one (that crashes and hangs unless you disable 3D Acceleration)
It is not all newbie-friendly.
I've reinstalled it N times to start from a better angle.
Not being able to edit the menu is beyond comprehension.
I am really scared of adding the other repositories because of the said conflicts.
Meanwhile it is the least hostile distro so far.
It feels fast and robust.
Beautiful fonts what do these guys do?
Hope my sister likes what I've done to her laptop.
I certainly do.
Guys, I've used Fedora 4 Test 1 and found it terrible. They have gutted GNOME Office and KDE Office, so that Abiword, Gnumeric and other key pieces of software have been removed.
Checksums are inaccurate, GDM mauls the processor and slows the whole machine down and GNOME system browsing is broken.
Bad, even for an early beta.
