[ucw]prophet Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Getting ready to try out Fedora. Anyone else have it installed yet? Here's some of the things I'm looking to find out: 1. Has anyone done an upgrade from RH9 to Fedora? If so, how'd it go? Any problems worth noting? 2. What are you using to update your Fedora system? Apt-get or Yum? 3. Anyone have a problem burning the ISOs at a high speed (i.e. 52x)? 4. For those who've had a chance to really play around with it, how stable does it seem? Does it need any work? Any kernel panics or anything of that nature? 5. ATI video drivers are supposed to be better supported. Anyone know this to be true via experience? Plus, I'd like to hear just general comments about people's experiences with Fedora. I'm going to be writing an article on it and want as much feedback as I can possibly get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+BudMan MVC Posted November 8, 2003 MVC Share Posted November 8, 2003 Well - have not done an upgrade of existing RH9 systems yet. I normally do not upgrade anyway. Install looks like the RH 9 install, with some change in color and replacement of Red Hat with Fedora - if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danrarbc Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 The only problem I've heard of with upgrading is things get messed up if you have Ximian Desktop installed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[ucw]prophet Posted November 8, 2003 Author Share Posted November 8, 2003 Okay ... here's what I've learned about Fedora thus far: 1. The install is the same anaconda that RH has been using in the past, only rebranded for Fedora. Some options have changed a bit, like the firewall, but for the most part its still the same installer. 2. The interface is a bit cleaner than RH9. More custom icons in the menus and such. 3. There's a GUI boot interface by default. You can click on a button to show the old boot interface through the GUI. It looks good, and shows you what items are loading. Much better than the old text boot RH has always used. 4. This version of Fedora still has the same look and feel of RH9. Ultimately, I think this is a benefit for those familiar with RH9 moving on to Fedora. It's basically Red Hat with alot of updated software. If you're looking for a fast server to download Fedora from, I recommend the following: Yarrow ISO Disc 1 Yarrow ISO Disc 2 Yarrow ISO Disc 3 I'm getting on average 150 Kbps, and have seen it hit a peek of 300 Kbps at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[ucw]prophet Posted November 8, 2003 Author Share Posted November 8, 2003 The only problem I've heard of with upgrading is things get messed up if you have Ximian Desktop installed. Yeah, I've read about that too. Apparently it's recommend for users to completely uninstall Ximian, install Fedora, and re-install Ximian. Personally, I'm really enjoying Gnome 2.4. It'd be difficult for me to understand why people would want to downgrade their version of Gnome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rezza Veteran Posted November 8, 2003 Veteran Share Posted November 8, 2003 When I installed it on a client's PC, it sorted their radeon 9500 np out straight away, installing the correct kernel modules (AKA "drivers" for you people still stuck in windows-land) and configuring everything very well by itself. I didn't even have to touch the XF86Config file. That's the first ever distro that thats happened with. Fedora core = damn good distro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CloudEngineer Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Slackware or fedora? decisions decisions :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danrarbc Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Slackware or fedora? decisions decisions :\ If you've got the bandwidth why not try both (Y) I sadly don't have that luxury right now :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1kstanc3 Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Fedora wouldnt even load on my regular pc... i have no idea why not it crashes during the anaconda installer. this is on my soltek nv400 motherboard w/9800pro. however SuSE and RH9 install just fine... mandrake 9.2 didnt install either. now get this. Fedora installs fine on my kt333 w/gf4 ti4200 fine. but mandrake 9.2 didnt it also crashes at startup like Fedora did on my nvidia box. mandrake 9.2 DID however install on my old ass sony vaio f350. so i eventually went with windows 2000 on my nvidia box. red hat 9 on my via box. and mandrake 9.2 on my laptop. talk about installation problems =p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iguana Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 Slackware or fedora? decisions decisions :\ Go for Slack. You will be pleased, believe me. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[ucw]prophet Posted November 8, 2003 Author Share Posted November 8, 2003 I thought I'd share my Fedora Core apt repositories in /etc/apt/sources.list: # FreshRPMs Fedora Core 1 rpm http://ayo.freshrpms.net/fedora/ linux/1/i386 updates freshrpms #rpm-src http://ayo.freshrpms.net/fedora/ linux/1/i386 updates freshrpms # Misc Fedora Core 1 rpm http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os updates stable #rpm-src http://mirrors.kernel.org/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os updates stable rpm ftp://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/pub/linux/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os updates stable #rpm-src ftp://ftp.ussg.iu.edu/pub/linux/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os update rpm http://mirrors.usc.edu/pub/linux/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os updates stable #rpm-src http://mirrors.usc.edu/pub/linux/fedora/fedora/ fedora/1/i386 os updates stable If anyone else has more, please post them. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mintah Posted November 8, 2003 Share Posted November 8, 2003 here are some few apt repositories rpm http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/0.95/i386 stable unstable testing rpm-src http://rpm.livna.org/ fedora/0.95/i386 stable unstable testing and btw... I am in love with Fedora.. Easy Installl! Gnome 2.4. OpenOffice 1.1 out of the box... I even updated my kernel to the 2.6 test kernel from redhat with no problems... definitely recommended. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockett15 Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 :) Yes I have and couldnt be happier! Fedora is fast and just works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR_Candyman Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I like the looks of it, ect. BUT why are they using such an old version of the RH kernel??? Geez...that's older than the one I got working with Jamd! It doesn't have built-in support for my pci wireless card, and I NEED that on startup...so fedora's not staying on this box... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxBoy Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I'll replace my existing RH9 on my Laptop with this. I love trying out new stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iguana Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 Not too many changes, graphically speaking... :/ I'll stick with Slackware, thanks. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danrarbc Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I like the looks of it, ect. BUT why are they using such an old version of the RH kernel??? Geez...that's older than the one I got working with Jamd! It doesn't have built-in support for my pci wireless card, and I NEED that on startup...so fedora's not staying on this box... Didn't they include an optional 2.6 kernel too? Try that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eevoo Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 errr i tried to install this but it would not pick up on my DHCP, but noone else seems to be haveing any problems. :pinch: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machima Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 I assume Fedora doesn't include NTFS support by default? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 ive been running fedora since beta 2 and i must say its a great distro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudydoo Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 There are NTFS RPM's for Fedora Core 1 at http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/red...edhat/rh10.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwk3 Posted November 9, 2003 Share Posted November 9, 2003 i've been running it for two days now. i firggin love it. it's a little cleaner than redhat 9 and has the same feel since it's pretty much the same os. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[ucw]prophet Posted November 9, 2003 Author Share Posted November 9, 2003 BUT why are they using such an old version of the RH kernel??? It's not that old. My current kernel version is 2.4.22-1.2115 ... which falls in with the current stable kernel version listed at kernel.org. Granted that it's not 2.6-testX, but it's been noted on several different occations that the next Fedora release will coincide with the 2.6 kernel. Considering that the 2.6 kernel release is litterally going to happen any time now, look for an updated version of Fedora soon after. Didn't they include an optional 2.6 kernel too? Try that. I'ved looked at all three CDs to see if there was an optional 2.6 kernel. There was only the 2.4.22. There are, however, kernel updates available from Red Hat located at http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/2.5/RPMS.kernel/. These are experiemental, based on the 2.6-test9 kernel and built for RH9. However, in theory they should work with Fedora just fine. YUM users can add the following to /etc/yum.conf: [2.6testkernels] name=Test Linux 2.6-test prerelease kernels for RHL9/rawhide baseurl=http://people.redhat.com/arjanv/2.5/ Apt users can add the following to /etc/apt/sources.list: # Arjan's 2.6 series kernel repository rpm http://people.redhat.com arjanv/2.5 kernel rpm-src http://people.redhat.com arjanv/2.5 kernel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapnuts_ox Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 i didn't like the build of Xfree86 that came with Fedora. I had to install the build from RH9 to make X stable for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icuhackn Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I agree with ya Rockett. I finally got it installed, up and running. It is faster and looks good. Still need to setup some other things, but I truly love Fedora! :shifty: :) :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts