“Due to the recent upgrade of gcc and the subsequent full rebuild of everything that gets built with gcc, including java stuff with gcj, and the need to further test package selection windows in Anaconda, system-config-packages for upgrades, and the development tree in general once we settle down the rebuilds, we have decided to delay test2. Here is a new schedule that we will be working toward.”
So does this mean FC5 will use GCC 4.1 or GCC 4.0.2?
FC5 will use (not released yet) GCC-4.1.x
(A massive rebuild would not be necessary if it used 4.0.x)
I guessed that, but when reading an article like this, I shouldn’t have to guess. So… will GCC 4.1 include the fancy, new optimizations that make many programs run faster?
will GCC 4.1 include the fancy, new optimizations that make many programs run faster?
Faster? I don’t know, but total memory
usage should go down a bit.
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-December/msg0…
Which Version of Gnome will FC5 use? (2.12,2.14…?)
2.13/2.14.
Being time based, FC5 was supposed to include the latest 2.13.x release.
I assume that with the delay, it is very likely that it’l l include the latest release out of the box.
Gilboa
The release cycle for Fedora Core 5 is now nine months long, which is quite a change from the plan to make two or three releases per year. Also Gnome 2.14 is expected to be released on the same day (March 15), so with a small additional delay Fedora Core 5 could have Gnome 2.14.
The release cycle for Fedora Core 5 is now nine months long, which is quite a change from the plan to make two or three releases per year. Also Gnome 2.14 is expected to be released on the same day (March 15), so with a small additional delay Fedora Core 5 could have Gnome 2.14.
Pardon? I always assumed the Fedora release cycle went in sync with the GNOME and Xorg release cycle – that is how I always interpreted out things were done.
“Pardon? I always assumed the Fedora release cycle went in sync with the GNOME and Xorg release cycle – that is how I always interpreted out things were done.”
While GNOME 2.14 is scheduled to be included Fedora releases are based on their own release criterias not tied to DE’s
<cough>
Don’t you find it rather co-incidental that GNOME and Fedora releases seem to cross over each other?
I am a debian convert. I switched to debian from fedora mainly because debian has much larger collection of softwares. Softwares which I prefer are hard to get in Fedora. Yes I can get them in Fedora too but it mostly requires compiling from source. With the imminent release of fedora core 5, I hope they have updated their package repositories.
I think fedora should ship with flash support, mp3 support and so on out of the box which will give it wider acceptance.
I think fedora should ship with flash support, mp3 support and so on out of the box which will give it wider acceptance.
It seems as though every time someone mentions Fedora / RedHat someone mentions this old, dead, tired, never going to happen unless legal situation changes argument. I mean really, everyone at this point should know that they cannot do it for legal reasons. You may not believe it, but it is so. It is a violation of the GPL to ship software that uses MP3 technology. I could go on about the numerous problems with shipping patented technology, but I won’t since many others have already covered it adequately.
It seems as though every time someone mentions Fedora / RedHat someone mentions this old, dead, tired, never going to happen unless legal situation changes argument. I mean really, everyone at this point should know that they cannot do it for legal reasons. You may not believe it, but it is so. It is a violation of the GPL to ship software that uses MP3 technology. I could go on about the numerous problems with shipping patented technology, but I won’t since many others have already covered it adequately.
WRONG. .. And again and again, people keep on mentioning “legal” reasons. They themselves choose not to support it for idealogical reasons. There is absolutely nothing illegal about shipping with MP3 support. The only way it can be illegal would be if they charged for the distribution but did not pay licensing fees. (In other words, free-of-cost MP3 support = free-of-cost distribution).
WRONG. .. And again and again, people keep on mentioning “legal” reasons. They themselves choose not to support it for idealogical reasons. There is absolutely nothing illegal about shipping with MP3 support. The only way it can be illegal would be if they charged for the distribution but did not pay licensing fees. (In other words, free-of-cost MP3 support = free-of-cost distribution).
Well that’s all fine and dandy, until you consider the fact that it is against the law to infringe on a patent whether or not it is commercially.
“WRONG. .. And again and again, people keep on mentioning “legal” reasons. They themselves choose not to support it for idealogical reasons”
its not. Its done for both legal and idealogical reasons. All the current so called open source implementations are licensed under LGPL and GPL and both of them require a explicit patent grant. Any restrictions such as those within the mp3 patent are basically a violation of the licenses and prove to be a license conflict which makes any attempt to redistribution illegal in places where software patents are supported. see claus 11 and 7 of these licenses for details.
Also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems
Thats a load of bull. Suse 10 eval comes with full mp3 support plus many other goodies out of the box and its free so there ya go. Why would Novell engage in “illegal” practices? There is nothing illegal about it. Its FOSS purists that curb Linux adoption. Thats why I switched to Suse and plan to stay with them as long as they keep bringing some sense into this.
“Thats a load of bull. Suse 10 eval comes with full mp3 support plus many other goodies out of the box and its free so there ya go. Why would Novell engage in “illegal” practices? There is nothing illegal about it”
SUSE Eval is choke full of proprietary software. providing a proprietary implementation of mp3 is not illegal since RealPlayer has already bought a patent license. However a open source implementation under the GPL or LGPL license is illegal in regions where software patent laws exist without a patent grant which the patent holder is not willing to provide
its not. Its done for both legal and idealogical reasons.
Well, considering that Red Hat have also removed support from their kernel for NTFS, you have to seriously question the legal angle they come up with. The legal perspective is totally bogus simply because the patent that Fraunhofer supposedly has is extremely vague and not proven legally. The Linux distributors are actually enforcing the patent without any legal backing or proof!
If you look at patent 5,579,430 the patent is so broad you can drive a truck straight through it. For one, it makes absolutely no mention of the MP3 format itself whatsoever and certainly doesn’t define it. It provides a very vague description of how one might digitally encode and compress sound, but really, you could apply it to all formats today, including WMA and ogg. Considering that it describes how you might go about doing something rather than a specific implementation or what the patent actually applies to, it just doesn’t hold water. It’s also totally unclear whether Fraunhofer can actually patent any implementation of MP3, or whether they can only do so with their own. Fraunhofer certainly didn’t invent MP3.
I’m also trying to work out why Fraunhofer has not tried to shut down projects like Lame. Until they try and do that there’s nothing to answer here. Anyway, I’m sure the money they get from Creative and Real for doing nothing will keep them happy in retirement.
All the current so called open source implementations are licensed under LGPL and GPL and both of them require a explicit patent grant.
Considering that it is extremely unclear whether this patent applies to an implementation like Lame, it is by no means certain that there is anything to get a patent grant for. Should ogg Vorbis be seeking a patent grant as well?
It is simply unacceptable for any operating system to not have full MP3 support in their desktop these days, and Linux distributors should be standing up behind their own software rather than doing the work of these patent companies for them. If you were being cynical you might argue that Linux distributors are deliberately restricting the use of free and open source software in order to make more money.
No, there is no legal reason why MP3 support cannot be added because there is simply no legal proof or backing for its removal. People have simply heard that Fraunhofer and Thomson have patented MP3 encoding and decoding and they’ve believed it.
Edited 2005-12-20 11:32
“Well, considering that Red Hat have also removed support from their kernel for NTFS, you have to seriously question the legal angle they come up with. The legal perspective is totally bogus simply because the patent that Fraunhofer supposedly has is extremely vague and not proven legally. The Linux distributors are actually enforcing the patent without any legal backing or proof! ”
Ya right question a professional legal team without any background in patent laws. We should trust you in favor of that. right sonny?
”
Should ogg Vorbis be seeking a patent grant as well? ”
huh. OGG Vorbis does have a patent grant. Get a clue
Ya right question a professional legal team without any background in patent laws.
Who says it has been looked at by a professional legal team? I find it amusing how many people wave away stuff that’s been described to them because they think some professional people have supposedly looked at it all.
They’ve simply looked at it, not wanted to rock the boat and took it out for their own purposes.
huh. OGG Vorbis does have a patent grant. Get a clue
Many concepts described in said patent above apply to many, many compressed sound formats. It is by no means MP3 specific, so ogg providing a patent grant for their own format means nothing. It’s just they haven’t been challenged yet. When they do, will ogg support be removed?
You did of course read it all (and look up the patent itself) instead of replying like a twit, didn’t you?
And still on the subject – what on Earth is JPEG and PNG support still doing in Fedora and other distributions?
Edited 2005-12-20 11:56
“Who says it has been looked at by a professional legal team? I find it amusing how many people wave away stuff that’s been described to them because they think some professional people have supposedly looked at it all.”
Ya right. Red Hat works on patent reforms without any patent lawyers. Thats a believable story.
“Many concepts described in said patent above apply to many, many compressed sound formats. It is by no means MP3 specific, so ogg providing a patent grant for their own format means nothing. It’s just they haven’t been challenged yet. When they do, will ogg support be removed? ”
MP3 patents simply do not apply to OGG Vorbis formats. learn about the lineage a bit before talking cluelessly yet again
Ya right. Red Hat works on patent reforms without any patent lawyers. Thats a believable story.
That statement still doesn’t deal with the issues raised. They’ve showed it to a couple of lawyers, and within thirty seconds they’ve told them it’s a risk, as they all do, not that it is illegal to do so.
MP3 patents simply do not apply to OGG Vorbis formats. learn about the lineage a bit before talking cluelessly yet again
Read the patent before swallowing the Red Hat/Fedora spew on the subject like a twit. Just because it’s a different format, or a different lineage, that does not mean that it is not subject to any patent claims, as with many formats. That’s the nature of patents. The Fraunhofer patent does not refer to MP3 directly at all. It merely lists many of the characteristics of compressed audio formats, some more MP3 specific than others.
Like I said – you did read the patent, didn’t you? The legal reasons Red Hat comes up with depend on the patent being legally proven, which it isn’t. They should just be honest about their reasons – “There are no solid legal reasons yet, but we’re really, really, really scared of being sued”.
Edited 2005-12-20 12:46
“Read the patent before swallowing the Red Hat/Fedora spew on the subject like a twit. Just because it’s a different format, or a different lineage, that does not mean that it is not subject to any patent claims, as with many formats. That’s the nature of patents. The Fraunhofer patent does not refer to MP3 directly at all. ”
Ok. stop bullshitting around. Debian, Ubuntu etc have decided exactly the same thing based on their own legal team and do not provide any mp3 support out of the box.
No, there is no legal reason why MP3 support cannot be added because there is simply no legal proof or backing for its removal. People have simply heard that Fraunhofer and Thomson have patented MP3 encoding and decoding and they’ve believed it.
Yes, there are legal rasons, and no I’m not going to trust random internet person’s (you) legal advice. Do you honestly think for a moment that RedHat wouldn’t ship GPL software that uses MP3 patented technology if they could *without* any concerns and all the benefits? Really, think about it.
The point is not whether the MP3 patent is valid, the point is the GPL requires that GPL software only use patented technology that is available for all to use freely, not just some.
If you’re so convinced that the MP3 patent is invalid, why don’t you start a website and a crusade and put your own money (and other assets) at risk to stop the “injustice” you perceive with the MP3 patent. Don’t ask others to do what you won’t do yourself.
sounds like the GPL is what is holding GNU/Linux back.
“sounds like the GPL is what is holding GNU/Linux back.”
Get a clue. GPL is what made Linux what it is. It is the most used open source license out there. period. Every damn open source license worth its salt expect the almost public domain BSD license has a patent protection claus including MPL or Sun CDDL or apache license whatever
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/gpl-compatible.html
Edited 2005-12-20 10:19
“With the imminent release of fedora core 5, I hope they have updated their package repositories. ”
Yes. Over 7000 packages are available in Core and Extras repositories enabled by *default*
“I think fedora should ship with flash support, mp3 support and so on out of the box which will give it wider acceptance.”
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems
Fedora just like Debian does not support proprietary software. In fact it does not even have a official repository like debian non-free. The only third party repository which comes close is rpm.livna.org. see fedorafaq.org for more details. people, stop posting requests to include proprietary and legally encumbered software
“Yes. Over 7000 packages are available in Core and Extras repositories enabled by *default* ”
That is fine but I would still like to see a greater variety of software included on the compact disks as well. It would be better to have a lot of niche applications and best of breed tools on the disks that are readily visible to new users. Software such as Scribus, Rosegarden or an equivalent and so on would be a great advertisement for the depth and breadth of open source available.
Duplicates of other tools (such as the three or four different web browser currently installed by default) should be in the Extras.
“That is fine but I would still like to see a greater variety of software included on the compact disks as well”
Nothing is stopping you from pulling packages from extras repository and creating ISO images out of them
”
Duplicates of other tools (such as the three or four different web browser currently installed by default) should be in the Extras.”
Incorrect. Only firefox is installed by default.
That is fine but I would still like to see a greater variety of software included on the compact disks as well. It would be better to have a lot of niche applications and best of breed tools on the disks that are readily visible to new users. Software such as Scribus, Rosegarden or an equivalent and so on would be a great advertisement for the depth and breadth of open source available.
There’s a reason it’s called Fedora Core and not Fedora Has Everything I Could Ever Want
I am a debian convert. I switched to debian from fedora mainly because debian has much larger collection of softwares. Softwares which I prefer are hard to get in Fedora. Yes I can get them in Fedora too but it mostly requires compiling from source. With the imminent release of fedora core 5, I hope they have updated their package repositories.
I think fedora should ship with flash support, mp3 support and so on out of the box which will give it wider acceptance.
>
>
Guess what? Nobody cares what parasites like you think.
Quote I switched to debian from fedora mainly because debian has much larger collection of softwares.
Among those large collection of softwares, how many are depreciated or obsolete? Fedora mostly uses new packages. Want Fedora to get more software? Become a contributor/maintainer.
Quote Softwares which I prefer are hard to get in Fedora. Yes I can get them in Fedora too but it mostly requires compiling from source.
Learn to create a package for Fedora Extras as long it is not patented or closed sources.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras
For example, an user who wants to get gdesklets decided to create a rpm, follow the guide, submit the package for evaluation, got approved when problem is fixed, release the srpm to the main build which make it available in Extras repository.
It is surprisingly simple than you think.
Edited 2005-12-20 08:04
or at least make it so that installing flash/mp3/foo is brain dead easy. i like fedora quite a bit, but they seriously need to get them selves a GUI package manager.
i personaly prefer using the terminal, however there are thousands of people that don’t want anything to do with command lines
or at least make it so that installing flash/mp3/foo is brain dead easy. i like fedora quite a bit, but they seriously need to get them selves a GUI package manager.
There are third parties that make it fairly easy to install these components already. RedHat is about Open Source and Free Software, not proprietary, patent encumbered software — that useful or not has too many legal complications. Why should a free software project spend money supporting proprietary software? It shouldn’t. Besides, legally speaking, being an accomplice to illegal activities is frowned upon just as much as doing in them in certain cases. It’s better that they avoid such legally questionable software altogether (mainly speaking of MP3 technology, flash is a different story).
i personaly prefer using the terminal, however there are thousands of people that don’t want anything to do with command lines
And they don’t have to, they just need to use one of the many third party software repositories available for Fedora.
RedHat is about Open Source and Free Software, not proprietary, patent encumbered software.
That is nice but seems like all new and great technology that companies are developing and putting out are proprietary, patent encumbered software. That only Windows are able to use to the full extent.
”
That is nice but seems like all new and great technology that companies are developing and putting out are proprietary, patent encumbered software. That only Windows are able to use to the full extent.”
Buy RHEL. Though still open source it has thousands of ISV while supply you whatever windows support patented proprietary stuff you want or learn about open source and technology that doesnt lock you into a single vendor. Fedora is about more of the open source stuff and nothing to do with patent proprietary crap
Edited 2005-12-20 10:21
“i personaly prefer using the terminal, however there are thousands of people that don’t want anything to do with command lines”
Every release of Fedora has included a applet to update software merely by point and click. For Fedora core 5, there is pup.
Screenshot http://people.redhat.com/sundaram/pup.png referenced from this nice talk
http://umeet.uninet.edu/umeet2005/talks/?lang=en&s=fedora
Fedora has a gui package manager called pup. Also yumex and kyum in fedora extras.
pup is an updater i.e. frontend of yum update. System-config-packages is on major redesign to use yum as backend. The new version aims for simplicity.
The delay will be beneficial so Anaconda may got most of major changes stable.
The best help I’ve had for Fedora Core is on http://www.fedorafaq.org. Yum repositories, mp3 plus other multimedia setup, and proprietary drivers are all a one command install.
I wish they’d drop gcj or make it optional in Fedora. It’s such a pain to rip out and replace with real Java.
Yet another misinformed post. see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JavaFAQ for a robust solution or http://fedorafaq.org for a quick step and read man alternatives. Its very trivial
>Yet another misinformed post.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JavaFAQ for a robust solution or http://fedorafaq.org for a quick step and read man alternatives. Its very trivial
What if you want to install ant/tomcat/spring/struts/log4j/jboss from jpackage?
yum install ant
will report that you need gcj
you don’t want gcj if you already installed a java from sun/ibm/oracle/bea.
It would be nice if the was java_ex repository
those who prefer jpackage would use jpackage
those who prefer gcj/gij + all the rest would use java_ex
PS I think gcj is very good idea, but it’s not very stable for server solutions.
“yum install ant
will report that you need gcj ”
It wont if you use alternatives properly
read the FAQ again and man page of alternatives
“PS I think gcj is very good idea, but it’s not very stable for server solutions.”
Oh yes it is. Red Hat has been doing that precisely…
It’s not misinformed. If you try to install Sun’s RPM for jre-1.5.0 you will find that you cannot install/upgrade it side-by-side with the gcj RPMs because RPM will (correctly) try to upgrade something that provides “java” which will try to remove java-gcj-compat and cause OpenOffice to complain. I’ve tried to use jpackage things before, but it’s extra work to maintain something extra when RPMs already exist from the language’s distributor and is annoying.
Given that Sun does not list Fedora Core as a supported configuration on http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/system-configurations.html
you can not just take Sun’s RPMs, and expect to install them flawlessly. That has nothing to do with gcj, you are simply trying to use Sun’s software on a system on which Sun does not support it. If stuff breaks, you get to keep the parts, and it’s noone else’s fault.
If you need Sun to support their RPMs on Fedora Core, you’ll have to ask Sun for support. Otherwise, ou could just use JPackage’s RPMs, which correct and work around a couple of problems in Sun’s RPMs on platforms not supported by Sun.
cheers,
dalibor topic
If there was another OS that could detect all my hardware then I would use it.
This the real flaw of alternative os’.
I used FC3 for a while as my full-time platform, I had no issues with it other than yum. It was painful to use in that it was so slow, particularly when compared to apt-get. Even Yast is faster. By slow I mean when querying for packages, accessing the repos, package db etc. The actual installation and dependency resolution seemed fine.
Has yum improved performance-wise? I played with FC4 Test 1 for a week or so, didn’t see a huge improvement. Not trying to troll or anything, I’m legitimately curious.
I’m still running FC3 on an older machine for a home server, and I imagine I’ll upgrade to FC5 since FC3 is going legacy, not that I guess that really matters, but man, yum still pains me.
“Has yum improved performance-wise? I played with FC4 Test 1 for a week or so, didn’t see a huge improvement. Not trying to troll or anything, I’m legitimately curious. ”
By leaps and bounds. FC4 final releases included a newer version of yum which used sqllite for great improvement. Again FC5 test 1 included a additional cache implementation for speed. Yum-utils in Fedora Extras provides a fastestmirror yum plugin which can increase this even better. Also learn to use yum -C option if you are using previous releases
I prefer Smart Package Manager (http://labix.org/smart)
to the various yum front-ends or apt/synaptic
has anyone done the move (on servers) – I don’t want to pay for RHEL, and it seems like I get the commercial Solaris distro for free, with source. Anyone else done the move?
“has anyone done the move (on servers) – I don’t want to pay for RHEL, and it seems like I get the commercial Solaris distro for free, with source. Anyone else done the move?”
Commercial solaris with support is NOT free. The “open” solaris version which is not self hostable is free with NO support from Sun. Sun basically is trying to copy the RHEL model where Red Hat was the leader in proving subscriptions down to the pricing and doing a poor job with that
http://www.crn.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=174900064
” Sun Microsystems has at last delivered on its vow to become the Red Hat of the proprietary software world.”
Who wants to move over to a copycat from a market leader?. Red Hat already provides stuff like GFS filesystems and Systemtap (RHEL 4 U2) in their releases that there is no advantage in any migration from a community developed multi vendor supported operating system like Linux to a single vendor supposedly open source system with proprietary bits and pieces all over and not a single open source build system or ISO images in sight using “community” as a smoke screen to test its own stuff.
Commercial solaris with support is NOT free. The “open” solaris version which is not self hostable is free with NO support from Sun. Sun basically is trying to copy the RHEL model where Red Hat was the leader in proving subscriptions down to the pricing and doing a poor job with that
He wasn’t talking about support though, he was talking about the operating system. Solaris 10 GA, Solaris Express, and OpenSolaris are all free for Commercial and Personal use (*see license for details). Secondly, as far as RedHat being the leader on pricing? Hah! What a laugh, SUN’s list prices for support of Solaris are way lower than RedHat and equivalent in nature.
Who wants to move over to a copycat from a market leader?. Red Hat already provides stuff like GFS filesystems and Systemtap (RHEL 4 U2) in their releases that there is no advantage in any migration from a community developed multi vendor supported operating system like Linux to a single vendor supposedly open source system with proprietary bits and pieces all over and not a single open source build system or ISO images in sight using “community” as a smoke screen to test its own stuff.
SystemTap doesn’t hold a candle to DTrace, any *real* developer would know that. RedHat isn’t free of proprietary bits either, try asking them for the source to RedHat Satellite Server sometime
Oh wait…they won’t give it to you even if you own a box with it on it!
Or how about the draconian license that says that once you decide to stop paying for support and your subscription expires you lose the right to use the operating system? Oh yes, friendly RedHat. No thanks.
As far as no advantage? DTrace, Zones, a true UNIX heritage, far higher reliability, and a far higher degree of engineering quality in Solaris speaks for itself. Before you say I’m just a RedHat hater, I’ve been using RedHat since 5.2 all the way through RHEL. I’m no anti-fanboy.
“He wasn’t talking about support though, he was talking about the operating system. Solaris 10 GA, Solaris Express, and OpenSolaris are all free for Commercial and Personal use (*see license for details). Secondly, as far as RedHat being the leader on pricing?”
Who the heck is going to deploy solaris with support?. I might as well as bloody use skyos or something.
So is Fedora or RHEL developer edition or Centos FREE and whoever talked about pricing. RHEL clearly blowed away solaris so much that they Sun is following Red Hat model in subscription and RHEL is clearly the market leader not in pricing but deployment and value
“SystemTap doesn’t hold a candle to DTrace, any *real* developer would know that.”
And we should believe you? why?
“As far as no advantage? DTrace, Zones, a true UNIX heritage,”
Again unix heritage means obsolutely nothing when you dont even use a Unix based init system and use xml ha ha. System Tap already included in RHEL is a very valid replacement for Dtrace regardless of your pointless blah blah. Ever heard of Frysk?. look that up sometime. Where is Sun’s equivelanet?. System Tap is supported by RH, Intel, IBM, HP and so on. Single vendor lockin like solaris is unnecessary and unless you can produce any scientific claims against reliability or scalibility of Linux considering all the industry evidence proving Linux capability you are not going to get any believers here
“Nothing is stopping you from pulling packages from extras repository and creating ISO images out of them”
You completely miss the point of the other post. It said extra software should be available by default. This is for the general public.
“Incorrect. Only firefox is installed by default.”
However, Epiphany and Konqueror (and from memory, at least one text-based browser) are also on the compact disks. However, there is no option to install a desktop publishing package from the compact disks. It is a pity open source has not matured beyond this by now.
“It said extra software should be available by default. This is for the general public. ”
Extra software *is* available by default from FC4 and in future versions
“However, Epiphany and Konqueror (and from memory, at least one text-based browser) are also on the compact disks”
Why does that bother you?
” It is a pity open source has not matured beyond this by now.”
What did you do to contribute eh?
Sorry, just had to bring it up.
10413 Packages in Portage as of this post. 22141 ebuilds.
Yes Gentoo is hard to install
Yes Gentoo takes forever to install on your old out dated computer.
Can it download every single thing NO, somethings like Sun’s Java you have to download, but it gives you the direct link.
Does it have everything that you will need for a Linux desktop YES.
You guys talking about having the newest Gnome or KDE, well Gentoo has it. What about GCC? ohh ya, we have it first. The new X.org we have that too, in 2 different ways.
Dont forget that there is some pre compiled builds also.
Also read the damm handbook all the way, that is where most people screw up in Gentoo.
Yes it does take time to compile everything, but its not like you cant go off and do other things while its compiling, its called multitasking, Linux is really good at that.
Like ive said before: Gentoo made me switch to Linux from Windows.
Edited 2005-12-20 10:35
10413 Packages in Portage as of this post. 22141 ebuilds.
Yes it does have about 3k more by default
Yes Gentoo is hard to install
Depends if you can read, more like easy to install but pretty boring.
Does it have everything that you will need for a Linux desktop YES
Most do, thats why there called Linux, heck I use Fedora/CentOS/FreeBSD/Solaris as desktops, so I guess if its got a *nix in it, it possible.
You guys talking about having the newest Gnome or KDE, well Gentoo has it. What about GCC? ohh ya, we have it first. The new X.org we have that too
Really, by default you have all that? Gentoo is one of the slowest distro’s about releasing Gnome into stable, gcc, are you kidding? Yeah you can install the latest, but its not default and your system isn’t built with it. Yes you can use one of the off/build/howto’s to get it, but it sure wasn’t as well built as Fedora. I followed a lot of the gcc4 threads, If you even read them, half say “Yes, fedora released a new patch to gcc, can we get it now”….
Seriously, quit trolling, I ran gentoo of 2 years or so, if you really really want bleeding edge, gentoo doesn’t even touch what you get in rawhide. Gentoo is a fine distrobution but when you talk like this, makes me think of funroll-loops.org
[rant]
LOL we better could call osnews, flamenews.com. *Geez* only a few good ontopic comments. Please people respect others choice too (thats what opensource is about), for the person above you might have to much free time using gentoo, I don’t. If you don’t have interesting comments please skip to next article …
[/rant]
Hell I do use FC4 and happy with that, lately there are a lot of packages in the extra repos. Install mp3 support is easy too imho just install the livna rpm for xmss and gstreamer. Seems FC5 will be fully yum based, so anaconda will start using yum too. Can’t wait when final version is out there ….
You can use apt/RPMS, with the RPM based distributions. There are plenty repositories,
you can start, for example, from http://freshrpms.net/
Is there any special system requirements for Linux
I tried install Linux (Fedore core 4) on a old Pentium III laptop I had lying around, I tried dual boot first, then a full install and it wouldn’t work, I get it to a point where it was all installed and asked to reboot, but from there it started and then just hung – tried it about 6 times before giving up
try some livecd’s first, like knoppix, kanotix (kanotix is the laptop-master, btw) and slax. and try the suse livecd. then choose one, or just install suse, which is the best for laptops (imho).
I use FC4 at home. I’m fairly happy with it, but a few things annoy me. First, at its release, it is a little too bleeding edge (as was my experience with FC2). A few too many things just don’t work. Also, I install the nvidia kernel module and a VPN kernel module, so I have to reinstall whenever they put a new kernel in the repository, which, early on, seemed to be every 3-7 days. I’d rather post-release udpates were focused on fixes rather than just getting the latest and greatest. I’m considering switching to Ubuntu’s next release since I’ve heard they tend to freeze more of their packages at release. Anyone have any Ubuntu experience along these lines?
Fedora newer releases are much better. Especially FC5 will rock. Stay with it
I am really looking forward to Fedora 5. Each new release shows great improvements!
“Extra software *is* available by default from FC4 and in future versions”
“Manmist”, did you actually bother to read the preceding posts before quoting out of context? We are talking about extra software on the CDs, not the Repository.
‘”However, Epiphany and Konqueror (and from memory, at least one text-based browser) are also on the compact disks”
“Why does that bother you?”‘
Again, your question follows a quote taken out of its context. Because putting multiple browsers on the ISOs yet excluding other, valuable niche programs, such as Scribus and Soundgarden is just a little short sighted and stupid.
“What did you do to contribute eh?”
I should not even bother to respond to a childish remark like this but needless to say I have been using Linux and, in particular, Red Hat releases almost since their inception. Many, many bug reports, enhancement suggestions and other forms of feedback, encouragement and constructive criticism have come from me. From your immature attitude, I dare say you were still in elementary school at that time. Grow up, son.
”
“Manmist”, did you actually bother to read the preceding posts before quoting out of context? We are talking about extra software on the CDs, not the Repository.
”
Go create those ISO’s and contribute to the project. Noone is stopping you. All the packages are public in source, binary and in a open cvs repository. A community project means that you contribute and not just whine
Again, your question follows a quote taken out of its context. Because putting multiple browsers on the ISOs yet excluding other, valuable niche programs, such as Scribus and Soundgarden is just a little short sighted and stupid.
”
Did you even bother suggesting to the developers that instead of just assuming they are stupid. If so where is your post to the development list or bugzilla reports?
”
I should not even bother to respond to a childish remark like this but needless to say I have been using Linux and, in particular,”
There is nothing childish about asking people to contribute and not merely whine. If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.
I’ve been using Fedora since Core 2. Meanwhile I have tried many other distros ranging from Gentoo to Ubuntu. Personally, nothing beats the polish the Fedora team has given their baby – I just keep going back to FC. Can’t wait for FC5 – the 9 month cycle is a blessing in disguise. Ubuntu however is on my Dell D600 – simply because stuff just works out of the box.