Void's Forums

by **siplus** » Thu Jan 01, 2004 6:40 pm

This may seem like a dumb question, but what does fedora "feel" like? does the default gui's have a similar look to them as the original redhats?

by **dishawjp** » Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:39 am

Hi Siplus,

Just think of FC1 as RH 10. It looks just about like RH9 except for saying "Fedora" on some splash screens and the default background. Other than that, it is just the newest and slickest version of RHL. Oh, there is no formal support from Red Hat.

Jim Dishaw

by **Membrax** » Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:41 am

Hi siplus.

Yep, you got it.
GUI is quite the same unless you decide to install other themes.

As many of us already told, in some cases you can even see & feel a speed improvement (I did at least) to run the new openoffice 1.1 for instance.

My personal point of view is that Fedora goes a bit further than RH ... Fedora goes actually where RH was meant to go.

Make the jump and have fun.

by **deepeyes** » Sun Feb 22, 2004 9:11 pm

Hi Siplus,

Fedora core 1 is fantastic, all the goodies that had to be very customized in RH9.0 eg Mozilla (java etc) Openoffice 1.1 is all there. If only this was out when I started with RH7.2, can't complain it has taught me alot.

I found it slightly Panther (Os X) looking in its start up.

Take a deep breath and jump in mate.

by **Griffin518** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 9:01 am

The only real difference that I've found, from a GUI standpoint, is the graphical booting screen. So instead of seeing all the services starting, in vesa mode, with the "[OK]" status' popping up... you see a little progress bar, and some purdy graphics.

The most annoying difference, from a low-level, is that FC1 starts a LOT more services by default... which makes me nervous. It's not much to complain about, though... since a couple of minutes of research, and it's pretty easy to figure out what you don't need to be running.

Cheers!

-Griffin-

by **Void Main** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 10:22 am

Griffin518 wrote:The only real difference that I've found, from a GUI standpoint, is the graphical booting screen. So instead of seeing all the services starting, in vesa mode, with the "[OK]" status' popping up... you see a little progress bar, and some purdy graphics.

Really? How do I turn this feature on (not that I would personally want it)? I've never seen that. I see all the services getting started just like in all the other versions and I have several FC1 installs. Most have been upgrades from older ones, but I even have done clean installs and don't see that. Maybe it only gets turned on with a "workstation" install which I have never done. I always do custom installs.

by **ZiaTioN** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:33 am

I get the same graphical login. I did a clean install on this machine and chose the "server" install for all the necessary servers I was interested in but I do not feel this has an impact on the status bar login with the pic of the monitor and tower.

Void do you start up your systems in runlevel 5?

If you do and you still do not see it then check your /etc/grub.conf file (if you use grub) for an entry matching the following:

Code: Select all: title Fedora Core (2.4.22-1.2149.nptl) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.4.22-1.2149.nptl ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb initrd /initrd-2.4.22-1.2149.nptl.img

That should do it for you.

Oh and I used the

Code: Select all

tags above to keep the proper indention levels.

by **Linux Frank** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 11:34 am

Mandrake does the same thing. It never did on my older system, with the exact same installation. Seems to be something initiated depending on the specs of the system. Faster processor, etc. I would also like to know what program is doing this.

by **Void Main** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 1:19 pm

Ahh, it must be the "rhgb" kernel param which I assume stands for "Red Hat Graphical Boot". Servers I boot to runlevel 3 and user machines I boot to runlevel 5, none have the graphical boot. Again, must be because I do "custom" installs. In fact come to think of it, on the custom install I'll bet there is a check box for graphical boot in the grub configuration. I am the type that would never check suck a thing and I probably never thought twice about it. Again, I can't imagine using it but it's strange that I never knew about it. :) I'll bet I can test it without changing anything by pressing "a" at the grub menu and appending "rhgb" to the kernel line.

by **Griffin518** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:56 pm

Void Main wrote:Ahh, it must be the "rhgb" kernel param which I assume stands for "Red Hat Graphical Boot". Servers I boot to runlevel 3 and user machines I boot to runlevel 5, none have the graphical boot. Again, must be because I do "custom" installs. In fact come to think of it, on the custom install I'll bet there is a check box for graphical boot in the grub configuration. I am the type that would never check suck a thing and I probably never thought twice about it. Again, I can't imagine using it but it's strange that I never knew about it. I'll bet I can test it without changing anything by pressing "a" at the grub menu and appending "rhgb" to the kernel line.

Yup... it's a new package. Unfortunately, I think the fedora team forgot to provide the non-graphical boot option in the text installer, which is what I usually use. My ATI cards have never liked the installer's use of the frame buffer.. ick.

Anyways, you'll only see it in run level 5, and obviously only if the package is installed. It's kind of nice for those users who you're just setting it up as a linux desktop for. My fiance loves it... she'll just transparently use windows, or linux (if I'm in KDE, which is rare)... whichever gui I'm booted into at the time.

-Griffin-

by **Void Main** » Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:59 pm

Actually I just researched it a little more. Still, it must not get installed on a "Custom Install" by default. There is an RPM called "rhgb" that must be installed (which actually was installed on my systems). You must also have the kernel param "rhgb" in your grub/lilo configuration file (which I did not have on any of my systems). In fact you'll want to use "rhgb quiet". I'm not quite sure why I've never seen this. At any rate, it's cute so I've changed my mind, it's staying on my laptop configuration. It still tells you what is starting (I didn't think it did by the sounds of it, but it does).

http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/addit ... ects/rhgb/

by **Griffin518** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 12:29 pm

Void Main wrote:Actually I just researched it a little more. Still, it must not get installed on a "Custom Install" by default. There is an RPM called "rhgb" that must be installed (which actually was installed on my systems). You must also have the kernel param "rhgb" in your grub/lilo configuration file (which I did not have on any of my systems). In fact you'll want to use "rhgb quiet". I'm not quite sure why I've never seen this. At any rate, it's cute so I've changed my mind, it's staying on my laptop configuration. It still tells you what is starting (I didn't think it did by the sounds of it, but it does).

http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/addit ... ects/rhgb/

That's odd... it gets installed by default, under "custom" for me. I always do a custom install, so I can vouch for this. Ah well... it's a nice pretty feature, if you're booting into the GUI.

by **Void Main** » Sat Apr 10, 2004 12:45 pm

You are probably right. I must have removed the "rhgb" from the kernel entry in the grub.conf. Either that or I'm losing my mind, which is very likely. :)

by **Calum** » Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:33 pm

well for me it did its graphical boot thing by default, and i always do custom install. however i think i only saw it using fedora 1.90 and i do not remember seeing it on the older fedora rc1 that i had a while ago. so maybe it's really new.

anyway i can't check now because i found a lot of funny stuff with fedora so reinstalled rh8 over the top of it and upgraded to 9.0 using freshrpms and apt.

by **Griffin518** » Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:56 pm

Calum wrote:well for me it did its graphical boot thing by default, and i always do custom install. however i think i only saw it using fedora 1.90 and i do not remember seeing it on the older fedora rc1 that i had a while ago. so maybe it's really new.

anyway i can't check now because i found a lot of funny stuff with fedora so reinstalled rh8 over the top of it and upgraded to 9.0 using freshrpms and apt.

Hmmmmm that's interesting. Why would you choose to install RH8, then upgrade? Don't have RH9 disks? Personally 8 +9 feel a lot more bloated than FC1.

I'm beta testing FC2 TR2... I've run into some serious issues... interesting to say the least.

Here's my bugzilla report: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120553

I've got an NFORCE2 based motherboard... which has been a trip with Fedora installs... If you're curious, I'll go into it.

Otherwise I won't waste my keystrokes.

-Griffin-

Void's Forums

What is Fedora like?

What is Fedora like?

Who is online