Fedora 8 Release Candidate 3 has been released. "Fedora 8 Release Candidate 3 has been released on the torrent site. Both DVD and Live images have been provided. Unless something goes terribly wrong, these will be the same bits (modulo gpg signed SHA1SUM files) that will go to the mirrors for the final Fedora 8 release." Update: There is an interview up about CodecBuddy's inclusion in Fedora 8 with the two developers behind this feature.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2007-07-25
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-07-25
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-02
Fans: 23
Do you have an ATI chipset with fglrx enabled, by any chance? There is a bug with kernel 2.6.22 and the proprietary ATI driver that prevents suspend from working.
There are three things you can do:
1) Make it so that closing the lid *doesn't* suspend the laptop (System --> Preferences --> Power Manager or something like that, my Ubuntu's in French...); pick another option, like turning off the screen or powering down the computer.
2) Not use the proprietary ATI driver. Of course, this means you won't be able to use desktop effects and 3D apps.
3) Install kernel 2.6.20 and use that one instead (that's what I did). You do need to tweak /etc/default/acpi-support a bit, though, i.e. make sure the following options are set:
SAVE_VBE_STATE=false
POST_VIDEO=true
USE_DPMS=false
Good luck!
Member since:2006-06-01
Fans: 0
Member since:2006-01-18
Fans: 1
Member since:2005-10-31
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-02
Fans: 23
Member since:2005-07-08
Fans: 34
Well, no. Your laptop vendor slowly kills your hard disk out of the box, and Ubuntu doesn't do anything to stop it. This could very well be a problem on other distributions as well. Windows basically ignores the firmware and sets its own defaults, so the hardware vendors haven't had any incentive to make their defaults reasonable. It's possible that some Linux distros handle this issue better than Ubuntu, but it's not an Ubuntu-specific issue. Any distro that trusts the hardware power management defaults will have the same problem.
I expect Ubuntu and other distros to ship workarounds for this problem, but they should also start bitching and moaning at the OEMs, like their new pal, Dell. It really is their fault, although for practical reasons it's easier for the OS distributors to address the problem for laptops that are already out in the field.
There are a bunch of workarounds. I used this one:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/acpi-support/+bug/59695/comment...
Computers suck. FOSS can make dealing with them a lot more pleasant, but the community cannot ignore whatever they can't fix properly. All developers, especially systems programmers, at some point reach a catharsis about the futility of perfectionism and cease to be surprised or outraged by the inherent suck that surrounds their work. I recommend a good scotch.
Member since:2005-11-11
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-07-26
Fans: 0
Member since:
2006-08-01
Fans: 0
Member since:
2007-06-24
Fans: 0
Member since:
2007-10-08
Fans: 0
It is great to see they are doing some improvements to YUM. I've used Fedora off and on, since FC3, and YUM was always a major drawback for me. It has been slow, and unresponsive for the most part. I think that Fedora is a good distro, and I'm also glad to see the Codec-Buddy. Seems like in the past Fedora has made it difficult to get codecs, and you have to do a lot of copy and paste from various wiki pages to get everything that you needed. I'm not real sure how useful having a background that changes colors with the time of day is though. I guess it's a cool technology, but better suited with Enlightenment, IMO, anyways.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
I agree that back in F2-F3 Yum was dog slow. Never the less, it has steadily improved on each release.
As long as your have fastestmirror package installed, Yum/F8 can rival apt in speed.
There are still some issues to fix (the assoying checksum-match problem - that should be auto-handled instead of need a manual 'yum clean all'), but there are getting there.
As for "Seems like in the past Fedora has made it difficult to get codecs" part, First it's wasn't Fedora's fault - the U.S. prevented them from doing anything that might help the user break the U.S law. (By gaining access to questionable codecs such as MP3)... but it was never "hard".
All you needed to do was to install a single RPM (livna-release) and install the missing codecs.
- Gilboa
Edited 2007-11-03 10:03
Member since:2005-07-24
Fans: 33
"""
I agree that back in F2-F3 Yum was dog slow. Never the less, it has steadily improved on each release.
As long as your have fastestmirror package installed, Yum/F8 can rival apt in speed.
There are still some issues to fix (the assoying checksum-match problem - that should be auto-handled instead of need a manual 'yum clean all'), but there are getting there.
"""
The three distros I use in my daily life and my business are CentOS, Fedora, and Ubuntu. I ran F8 for a bit, recently, for testing purposes. And while yum has gotten a lot better and has perfectly acceptable performance, it still can't match apt for speed. Apt handles dependencies faster, and downloads over my 12mbit connection faster. I think apt can pull bits from multiple servers at once.
That said, I have *not* had a chance to try out the new "presto" capabilities that have been enabled by default in F8. I'm anxious to see the benefits of delta patches.
Edited 2007-11-03 10:49
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
IMO, presto is not ready yet. (But I've yet to test it on newer versions of F8).
It was stable, but somehow, even on a dual quad-core Clovertown, yum seemed (IHMHO!) slower.
Hopefully it'll be ready by F9.
As for speed, a couple of months ago I would have agreed with you... however, my local Debian mirror is down and I'm forced to use remote servers, slowing down apt considerably. (netselect-apt didn't really help)
For now, with no local mirrors, apt is just as fast (or as slow) as yum.
- Gilboa
Edited 2007-11-03 10:58
Member since:2005-07-24
Fans: 33
I still have some machines running FC1. (They are POS stations which are never exposed to anything outside of their own small, trusted network.) I occasionally have need to install some package on them. And *oh my god!*, remember when yum downloaded all those zillions of little header files that it needed one by one uncompressed? Yum has, indeed, come far.
On delta updates. Suse has, of course, been doing them for years. At least they used to, and I assume they still do. I distinctly remember being thoroughly disappointed by their performance. Of course, that was a *long* time ago and things may have changed.
At any rate, the potential of deltas is huge for a distro like Fedora. I just spot checked (by adding up all the sizes of the updates in the i386 F7 updates directory), and Fedora has released over 6 Gigabytes of updates to F7 in less than six months. Of course, most people do not have *everything* installed, but still.
I should note, for those unaware, that this is not because Fedora is buggy and needs all those patches to fix stuff. Fedora tracks upstream, and if the upstream releases a 1.02 version to replace 1.01, Fedora will push that out.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 6
If you anyone is interested in Presto, there are working repositories available at
https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/presto/
Presto is a pretty neat feature IMO. Check it out.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 1
the assoying checksum-match problem
Ah, I am not alone.
I live in town with very greedy ISP, end watch for any extra traffic byte. After another kernel update( i tend to install only secutity or low size (< 1mb)updates ), start yum update kernel. metadata downloaded (5 MB!!!! terrific traffic, but necessary, 2-3 days w/o online and i compensate it), and... checksum error, try another mirror. Wait... another 5 mb metadata, checksum error... Damn, CTRL-C. Trying another mirror... CTRL-C CTRL_C CTRLC ... 5 мб loaded, checksum error, another... I urgently open terminal to server, hands tremor, wrong password, annother try, ok, killall pppd, Yes, it shut up. 30 MB traffic to trash, great.
That was worst day, I loose not only traffic but faith in progress. RedHat is very serious company, they support guys that familiar with black magic (CPU TLB issues, non standard hardware, all that stuff beyond mortal ) and so loose in simple file downloading.
Edited 2007-11-03 11:22
Member since:2005-07-24
Fans: 33
Member since:
2007-10-08
Fans: 0
For those who do not know about Pulse Audio, Linux.com has a good article about it here http://www.linux.com/feature/119926
Member since:
2005-09-27
Fans: 1
Member since:2006-07-16
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-10-08
Fans: 0
He could be using Comcast. 
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071021-comcast-traffic-block...
Member since:2005-09-27
Fans: 1
Member since:2005-11-12
Fans: 1
torrents are an issue for me too. I have Comcast broadband and I have been downloading the DVD for over 12 hours. bittorent-curses says I have 5.5 hours left! The problem with torrents is if not enough users have seeds available the download speed is very slow. I try to do my part and let bittorent upload from my torrent for several days after a release. Comcast is throttling uploads and probably limiting download speed of torrents too. I think there was some legal action against them recently.
Member since:2005-07-08
Fans: 0
Yes, Bittorrent is not often the fastest way to download.
Perhaps not a big surprise if some internet service providers may restrict Bittorrent traffic when many estimates state that Bittorrent and other peer-to-peer file sharing traffic may be responsible for about 40% of all Internet traffic.
http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-dominates-internet-traffic-07090...
Also according to Comcast the reason for occasionally delaying peer-to-peer file sharing traffic is "[i]to conserve bandwidth and allow customers to experience the Internet without delays."
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/comcast-were-delaying-not-...
http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=10300CL7I43E
Member since:2007-10-26
Fans: 0
I use Optus in Australia which counts uploads as well as downloads against my usage. So I don't use bitorrents as I would reach my cap quicker that way. I get shaped to 64Kb/s after 2000MB. And yes they did this becuase so many people are using P2P systems which actually costs them.
Member since:2005-07-09
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-10-26
Fans: 0
Member since:2006-01-09
Fans: 0
Member since:
2007-03-09
Fans: 0
Finally Fedora will have a KDE version. I will have to try it.
Kubuntu Gutsy Gibbon was a massive dissapointment to me because they do stupid things like making Dolphin as the default file manager, among other things.
Why is it so hard to find a good KDE based distro? There are many things I don't like in all of them.
I know everything can be customized in KDE, but I'd like to find a distro I could recommmend to other people too. You know, the kind of distro that would give a very good first impression.
Mepis 7.0 is also looking *very* interesting, but the final version is not released yet.
Member since:2007-10-08
Fans: 0
The only issue I see with using Mepis, is the fact that is is the work of only one developer. I'll admit he's doing great work, but I could easily see the distro falling out, such as was the case with Libranet. Personally, I would rather use a distro that has some backing, and support. The fact that the Mepis creator has been very quiet the past month, had several people worried, he might have health issues, when in fact, it just turned out, he got a job, and was devoting much time to something he can make money from.
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
"The only issue I see with using Mepis, is the fact that is is the work of only one developer. I'll admit he's doing great work, but I could easily see the distro falling out, such as was the case with Libranet. Personally, I would rather use a distro that has some backing, and support."
Yes, I see your point. We can only hope it turns alright. I really like the concept of Mepis 7.0. If it's a success, the project may get more developers.
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
"Huh? I've been exclusively using KDE as my desktop environment for ages under Fedora."
Yes but I'd like to find a *good* distro that has KDE as the *default* Desktop Environment. I'm a KDE "fan", so I don't want a distro that treats KDE as a second class citizen.
*And*, to recommend it to other people (mostly newbies), I want it to have good default settings, so they can feel comfortable with it right from the beginning.
So far, I've not been able to find a KDE based distro which meets both of these requirements.
EDIT: added quote
Edited 2007-11-02 22:58
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 6
"
Yes but I'd like to find a *good* distro that has KDE as the *default* Desktop Environment. I'm a KDE "fan", so I don't want a distro that treats KDE as a second class citizen. "
Well, for the KDE spin of Fedora, KDE is the default desktop environment and pretty much the same as vanilla upstream KDE apart from a bit of a cleanup. Try it out, you might like it.
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
Member since:2005-12-02
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-10-08
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
"Not sure what you are looking for, but Mepis, Mandriva, and openSUSE all have good defaults for KDE. They are all KDE based distros."
I didn't like the default panel layout of Mandriva 2008 (e.g. there is very little room for apps in the taskbar). It's also a bit too commercial distro for my taste. Otherwise it's pretty damn good. I especially prefer Mandriva's software management tool over Adept (esp. when doing updates).
OpenSuse.. hmmm.. haven't tried it yet. I have to admit that the deal with MS is still kind of a turnoff for me.
I'll try Mepis 7.0 as soon as it's out.
EDIT: added quote
Edited 2007-11-03 03:22
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 0
Member since:2006-02-20
Fans: 0
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
"Give PCLinuxOS a try. Its probably one of the best KDE distros out there. Been using it for the past couple of years and have always gone back to it after trying out several others."
Actually, I already tried PCLinuxOS. Not sure why I didn't like it either. It was quite good for my personal use but I couldn't recommend it to other people in my country - mainly because it lacks good localization (e.g. the installation program is only in english and localization in Firefox didn't work at all).
The most interesting feature of PCLinuxOS was the possibility to "roll your own distro" with just one command. Makes me wonder why distros don't make monthtly versions with all the updates included. It would be much more user friendly if you wouldn't need to install hundreds of megs of updates right after finishing the installation.
Member since:2005-11-12
Fans: 1
Fedora also has a "roll your own distro" application. It is called Revisor. Read about it: http://www.linux.com/articles/114347
Member since:2007-03-09
Fans: 0
"Fedora also has a "roll your own distro" application. It is called Revisor. Read about it: http://www.linux.com/articles/114347"
Thanks for the info. Maybe I should roll my own distro and recommend that..;) OTOH, I'd prefer to be able to just say "Download Distro X, it's very good. You'll absolutely love it!".
Edited 2007-11-03 00:22
Member since:2006-01-18
Fans: 1
Member since:
2006-08-01
Fans: 0
Unofficial DVD cover :
http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/cdart/werewolf/dvdjacket.png
CD :
http://www.molaora.com/data/files/SVG/werewolf_cover_0-1.svg
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 6
Member since:
2006-10-05
Fans: 0
Great feature list and they dont even explain everything.
Fedora team keeps bringing in new and exciting stuff. Can't wait for the final its going to be the first distro i put on in about 3 years. I tried ubuntu 7.10 but there was some laptop issues that turned me off. Just not exciting enough i guess.
So i take it the fedora fixed the yum problems everyone had? they got a GUI and now its faster and mature.
They fixed mp3 problem everyone complained about for years?
merged repos and have very big repositories now.
what else did people complain about I can't remember that was fedora specific? it appears they work to fix all their criticisms.
Member since:2005-07-22
Fans: 0
Nope, they have not 'fixed the mp3' problem. Until there is a codec that is totally free from any copyright and/or patent problems then it won't ship with Fedora.
Full Stop. Never No Way. no How.
That is how it is. Please get used to this and don't keep on asking for it with every release. It just is not going to happen. This has been explained ad nauseum for years (Sigh).
If you want mp3 (and other) codecs, then just add the livna repo to your YUM repo list and you are done.
Yes, YUM is much faster to get to the point where you start downloading.
Lets hope that the Laptop HDD problems that are in Ubuntu (OOTB) are not in Fedora.
I have rc3 running on a PPC Mac mini and everything works OOTB (like F7 BTW)
Member since:2005-11-12
Fans: 1
The CodecBuddy application with Fedora 8 allows you to install a free mp3 codec from Fluendo. All the other codecs Fluendo offer cost money. It is reasonable though, I think about $40.00 USD for a collection of windows media, mp3, mpeg, etc. Of course you can get the ugly gstreamer codecs from Livna for free. I thought it was a good compromise since it keeps Fedora free of patent problems but allows a user to easily add in media support.
Edited 2007-11-02 19:08
Member since:2005-07-06
Fans: 6
Member since:
2006-10-05
Fans: 0
lol i like that dvd cover, its got a product key on it and in fine print says authentication code not actually required lol nice touch.
http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/cdart/werewolf/dvdjacket.png
Member since:2007-11-03
Fans: 0