Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:30 UTC, submitted by Rahul
Fedora Core Fedora 8 Test 3 has been released. "Fedora 8 Test 3 is here! This is the last test release before the development freeze and a great time to test all those packages that you know and love. Test 3 is for beta users. This is the time when we must have full community participation. Without this participation both hardware and software functionality suffers."
Order by: Score:
NetworkManager 0.7
by Sodki (4.36) on Thu 4th Oct 2007 16:43 UTC
Sodki
Member since:
2005-11-10
Fans: 1

The release notes talk about NetworkManager being included in Fedora 8, but has NetworkManager 0.7 been released yet?

RE: NetworkManager 0.7
by Rahul (3.76) on Thu 4th Oct 2007 17:35 UTC in reply to "NetworkManager 0.7"
Rahul Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 6

Network Manager upstream is maintained by Dan Williams from Red Hat who also maintains the Fedora package. He has pushed a SVN snapshot

https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-October/msg00...

RE: NetworkManager 0.7
by zlynx (1.76) on Fri 5th Oct 2007 14:05 UTC in reply to "NetworkManager 0.7"
zlynx Member since:
2005-07-20
Fans: 0

From the notes it sounds like they *finally* made NetworkManager work without a user login.

That's why I've never used it before. I want my computer to be online even if no one is logged in.

RE[2]: NetworkManager 0.7
by dwave (3.24) on Sat 6th Oct 2007 00:44 UTC in reply to "RE: NetworkManager 0.7"
dwave Member since:
2006-09-19
Fans: 0

So why use NetworkManager at all? It is an interactive application. You should use the traditional ifup method.

RE[3]: NetworkManager 0.7
by chicklet (1.5) on Sat 6th Oct 2007 02:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: NetworkManager 0.7"
chicklet Member since:
2007-10-03
Fans: 0

"""

So why use NetworkManager at all?

"""

Speaking for myself and my FC7 box only... NetworkManager works well with wireless. The static scripts do not.

shots
by lqsh (3.2) on Thu 4th Oct 2007 21:05 UTC
lqsh
Member since:
2007-01-01
Fans: 0
RE: shots
by unoengborg (4.6) on Sat 6th Oct 2007 21:03 UTC in reply to "shots"
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

For once the Fedora team seam to have chosen a good desktop background. It is calm, and contains no annoying branding or other things that courld be mistaken for an icon. It is like they finally understood that a good desktop background should not draw attentinon from your real work, still it is not unattractive to look at.

Very well done! It gives Fedora a much more professional look, not to mention that it will make life easier to people with some eye sight problems.

RE[2]: shots
by spikeb (2.68) on Sun 7th Oct 2007 05:01 UTC in reply to "RE: shots"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18
Fans: 1

this is the first time the community has chosen the artwork.

You do know you can change the background, right?
by rklrkl (2.52) on Sun 7th Oct 2007 08:58 UTC in reply to "RE: shots"
rklrkl Member since:
2005-07-06
Fans: 0

Whilst it appears that most screenshots of new Linux releases don't seem to ever bother changing the background, you do know it's ridiculously easy to change the background (right click on background, select "Change Desktop Background")?

I always do this - I change it to a solid dark blue background on every distro I ever use (yes, including Ubuntu and SuSE). It's pointless having anything other than a solid colour in the background, because a lot of the time 80%+ of it is covered by windows anyway.

I for one
by anshu (1.53) on Thu 4th Oct 2007 22:18 UTC
anshu
Member since:
2005-09-03
Fans: 0

I for one surely going to test it. and blog about it. ;) .

RE: I for one
by spikeb (2.68) on Sun 7th Oct 2007 05:02 UTC in reply to "I for one"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18
Fans: 1

where is your blog and have you written about it yet?>

selinux
by Calipso (1.65) on Fri 5th Oct 2007 15:06 UTC
Calipso
Member since:
2007-03-13
Fans: 0

Just tested it. Looks pretty. Can't wait until its out.
However, I noticed that the little selinux notification app now only tells you that you need to create an selinux rule and doesn't actually give you the exact command to do it like it did in Fedora 7. I hope that is only the case in the live cd and not after you install it to the hard drive. I used to find that really useful.

RE: selinux
by buff (2.96) on Mon 8th Oct 2007 13:52 UTC in reply to "selinux"
buff Member since:
2005-11-12
Fans: 1

I noticed that the little selinux notification app now only tells you that you need to create an selinux rule and doesn't actually give you the exact command to do it like it did in Fedora 7

I just downloaded the latest test version and SELinux notification also had the command line rule you can add to allow certain requests through. I added the rule and the applications ran fine after that. It actually works!

Fedora Core 8
by GENIUS (-0.12) on Sat 6th Oct 2007 04:24 UTC
GENIUS
Member since:
2007-09-10
Fans: 0

Currently on FC6 will skip FC7 and go right to 8 on my work laptop, the only thing it would be nice if they had some desktop goodies to go along with RHEL5 client I run at work.

RE: Fedora Core 8
by spikeb (2.68) on Sun 7th Oct 2007 05:03 UTC in reply to "Fedora Core 8"
spikeb Member since:
2006-01-18
Fans: 1

that's fedora 7 and 8. there is no more core.

codec buddy?
by buff (2.96) on Sun 7th Oct 2007 14:13 UTC
buff
Member since:
2005-11-12
Fans: 1

Anyone have any experience using the latest Codec buddy with Fedora 8? This seems like a move in the right direction for usability with multimedia. I have gotten used to adding in mp3, divx, flash, windows media and realmedia by hand. How well does this new feature work?

The new pulseaudio sound server and Compiz-fusion inclusions have me very interested in Fedora 8. I tried out test 2 Live CD but it wouldn't pull up X correctly. I am hoping the final version will smooth out some of these more critical bugs.

Edited 2007-10-07 14:17

RE: selinux
by Calipso (1.65) on Mon 8th Oct 2007 17:15 UTC
Calipso
Member since:
2007-03-13
Fans: 0

I just downloaded the latest test version and SELinux notification also had the command line rule you can add to allow certain requests through. I added the rule and the applications ran fine after that. It actually works!


hmm I must have missed it. I'll have to check it out again.