Fedora Core 1

Place to discuss Fedora and/or Red Hat
Linux Frank
administrator
administrator
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 2:06 pm

Fedora Core 1

Post by Linux Frank » Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:34 pm

Here it is. Core 1 officially released today.

http://fedora.redhat.com/download/

It seems people are recommending bittorrent for downloading.

http://torrent.dulug.duke.edu/

ZiaTioN
administrator
administrator
Posts: 460
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 3:28 pm
Contact:

Post by ZiaTioN » Wed Nov 05, 2003 4:08 pm

Interesting. I will have to grab it when I get home.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Thu Nov 06, 2003 6:52 am

Got mine downloaded. Was getting aroung 260kB/s toward the end (that's ~2Mbps). I'll leave my bittorrent up for the rest of the day so others can continue to grab from me. Only getting arount 22kB/s upload rate though..

Linux Frank
administrator
administrator
Posts: 239
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 2:06 pm

Post by Linux Frank » Thu Nov 06, 2003 8:26 am

You should see this. Someone has tried to get a root exploit into bitkeeper CVS. If you download the CVS bitkeeper yesterday you will need to resync.

hours.http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/ ... /0621.html

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Thu Nov 06, 2003 8:45 am

Wow, I used the RPM from the link you posted in your initial note which I believe should be good as it was built a week or so ago. Man they are sure eating up all my bandwidth though. Makes this site dog slow... Going to be this slow until I get home I guess....

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Fri Nov 07, 2003 1:42 am

I have upgraded two of my RH9 machines to Fedora. Have a few minor snags but it looks nice. One machine I upgraded remotely via apt-get (I created my own Fedora os apt repository) and the other I upgraded from CD. For some reason mozilla doesn't start using the /usr/bin/mozilla script but it does start if I run the binary directly (/usr/lib/mozilla-1.4.1/mozilla-bin). It's probably something simple but I literally just got this up on it's first boot not more than 5 minutes ago. Will give a more detailed report later. I might upgrade the web server next if things look like a go.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Fri Nov 07, 2003 6:24 pm

Ok, I figured out the mozilla problem. It was tough to trouble-shoot because it wasn't giving any sort of error message. Turns out it didn't like the Java plugin in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins left over from my older mozilla 1.2.1 which was installed in RH9. This wouldn't have cropped up if it was a clean install I'm sure. At any rate, if anyone runs into this issue on an upgrade from RH9 they can solve it by removing the old /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin_oji.so file.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Sat Nov 08, 2003 8:09 pm

So far I'm really liking Fedora. Here's the first Fedora tip:

http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/redhat/fe ... _have.html

Yeah, I know it's a ripoff of my other two apt-get tips but hey. :)

agent007
administrator
administrator
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 11:26 pm

Post by agent007 » Sun Nov 09, 2003 12:59 pm

So, whats new with Fedora? Is it faster? more stable? worth the upgrade from 9.0?

thanks.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:32 pm

agent007 wrote:So, whats new with Fedora? Is it faster?
I had heard prior to installing Fedora that v1.1 of OOo is supposed to be significantly faster starting. RH10, I mean Fedora comes with OOo 1.1 where RH9 came with 1.0.1. I personally have noticed no performance improvement one way or the other, anywhere. But then I didn't seem to experience the slowness others had complained about with OOo 1.0.1,
more stable?
Don't know yet, it's only been out a couple of days. I'll let you know in a year of two, maybe less. ;)
worth the upgrade from 9.0?
I think so, especially since it doesn't cost aything to upgrade (except for my time, but hey it's a weekend and it's cold out). It does comes with more up to date packages like OOo 1.1, Mozilla 1.4.1, Evolution 1.4, Gnome 2.4, KDE 3.1.4, Apache 2.0.47, etc, etc. Keeping Red Hat 9 up to date will only give you security/bug fixes on the existing versions. This is a way to easily upgrade to the latest versions of your favorite software. I have 4 of my 8 machines at home now running it (2 of those machine haven't been used in quite some time or even turned on, the other 6 are on 24x7).

If you are familiar with RH 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3, then I would compare RH 8.0 to 7.0, RH9 to 7.2 and FC1 to 7.3 as far as the amount of change and noticable imporvement goes. But again, it's early in the game. I really liked 7.2 and I liked 7.3 even more.

caveman
programmer
programmer
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 1:08 pm
Location: Midrand Gauteng, South Africa

Post by caveman » Sun Nov 09, 2003 1:55 pm

All of my "live" sites are on RH7.3.

Except for my own personal machine that's on 9,
the development boxes are all on 7.3 as well.

Haven't seen my way clear yet to recompile, retest, new QA
on the new libs and kernels.
For now - and some long time in the future - we'll be stuck with 7.3.

Will upgrade my own machine in about 1-2weeks - and then see what
happens.
This was a vanilla install of RH 8 - upgraded to 81 beta and upgraded
to 9. So I'll keep up the tradition and upgrade to 10-ora (sic).

This weekend is (was) spent on getting Debian going on a spare box.
Nearly there - have some problems with the CD-RW.

Regards.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Sun Nov 09, 2003 2:08 pm

Yeah, at work we have a lot of Red Hat 7.x and RHAS 2.x stuff. Those are mainly just Oracle servers. I do most of my work on an RH8 machine that I would deperately like to upgrade. Of course it's much easier to keep all my home systems up to date as I don't really have anything critical running.

I find it easier to upgrade if you upgrade often. Letting a machine go too long causes it to become a bigger job. I also find it easier to keep up with all the security updates and the like if the entire system is up to the most recent version. Upgrading isn't quite as big of a deal on in house special purpose systems where you do all the development as you have mentioned. You really probably have no good reason to upgrade.

agent007
administrator
administrator
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2003 11:26 pm

Post by agent007 » Mon Nov 10, 2003 2:20 pm

VoidMain,

IS it true that there is no more RPM in Fedora?

thanks..

Master of Reality
guru
guru
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 8:25 pm

Post by Master of Reality » Mon Nov 10, 2003 2:37 pm

Void Main wrote:
agent007 wrote:So, whats new with Fedora? Is it faster?
I had heard prior to installing Fedora that v1.1 of OOo is supposed to be significantly faster starting. RH10, I mean Fedora comes with OOo 1.1 where RH9 came with 1.0.1. I personally have noticed no performance improvement one way or the other, anywhere. But then I didn't seem to experience the slowness others had complained about with OOo 1.0.1,
Ive noticed OpenOffice 1.1 quite a bit faster on Slackware then 1.0.1, i would presume it is faster on all the distros.

User avatar
Void Main
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5716
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 5:24 am
Location: Tuxville, USA
Contact:

Post by Void Main » Mon Nov 10, 2003 3:16 pm

agent007 wrote:IS it true that there is no more RPM in Fedora?
Heck no that's not true. If it was true I wouldn't use it. Not sure where you heard that one. :)

Post Reply