9:10 p.m.
Is Fedora 8 still on schedule for release early November? I'm still running
FC6, but I was thinking of upgrading to F7, however, if Fedora 8 is still
on-track for early November, I may just wait to upgrade.
9:20 p.m.
the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
--------------------
Itamar Reis Peixoto
e-mail/msn: itamar(a)ispbrasil.com.br
skype: itamarjp
icq: 81053601
+55 11 4063 5033
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Aldrich" <john(a)chattanooga.net>
To: <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:10 PM
Subject: F8 ETA?
Is Fedora 8 still on schedule for release early November? I'm
still
running
FC6, but I was thinking of upgrading to F7, however, if Fedora 8 is still
on-track for early November, I may just wait to upgrade.
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
7:34 a.m.
Christopher A. Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br> writes:
>> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
> Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still get into
> the release for a couple more days.
So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
Rawhide patches to the final version?
Very close. Maybe a dozen odd fixes apart.
Rahul
7:42 a.m.
On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br>
writes:
> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still get into
the release for a couple more days.
So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
Rawhide patches to the final version?
--
====================================================
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice there is.
--Yogi Berra
11:52 a.m.
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 06:42:12 -0600,
"Christopher A. Williams" <fedoralists(a)cawllc.com> wrote:
On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br> writes:
> > the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>
> Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still get into
> the release for a couple more days.
So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
Rawhide patches to the final version?
You might try a snapshot from the torrents page. There are some from the
19th, which is about two weeks more recent than test 3.
12:22 p.m.
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 06:42:12 -0600,
"Christopher A. Williams" <fedoralists(a)cawllc.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br> writes:
>>> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>> Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still get into
>> the release for a couple more days.
> So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
> Rawhide patches to the final version?
You might try a snapshot from the torrents page. There are some from the
19th, which is about two weeks more recent than test 3.
Rahul,
You said a few dozen things, do you know what those would be ?
Cheers,
Aly.
--
Aly Dharshi
aly.dharshi(a)telus.net
Got TELUS TV ? 310-MYTV or http://www.mytelus.com/tv
"A good speech is like a good dress
that's short enough to be interesting
and long enough to cover the subject"
4:19 p.m.
John Summerfield wrote:
Is this fixed?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251493
I have no idea especially for what looks like a hardware specific bug.
If you have that hardware, get the latest rawhide torrent, test it and
report back as comments in the bugzilla report. It isn't marked as a
blocker or even a target. So unless it has already been fixed there
isn't any specific effort likely to go into it after the last test release.
Rahul
4:36 p.m.
John Summerfield wrote:
>
Oh. It was fixed in F7, exists in 7.9x. There's recent discussion in
Fedora-test
I don't do torrent - is there another way to get it?
You could install any of the older test/general release of Fedora and
yum update/upgrade. Fedora 8 Test 3 would be close.
http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/7.92/
Rahul
4:40 p.m.
John Summerfield wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> John Summerfield wrote:
>
>>>
>> Oh. It was fixed in F7, exists in 7.9x. There's recent discussion in
>> Fedora-test
>>
>> I don't do torrent - is there another way to get it?
>
> You could install any of the older test/general release of Fedora and
> yum update/upgrade. Fedora 8 Test 3 would be close.
>
> http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/7.92/
>
> Rahul
>
Oh. I should have said that it exists in 7.92.
Yum update and see if the latest kernel fixes it and comment in the bug
report and adjust the release if not.
Rahul
5:05 p.m.
At 7:04 PM +0630 10/21/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br> writes:
>>> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>> Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still
>>get into
>> the release for a couple more days.
>
> So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
> Rawhide patches to the final version?
Very close. Maybe a dozen odd fixes apart.
The rest of the many fixes become the "day zero updates", which helps keep
the install media images close to what was tested.
--
____________________________________________________________________
TonyN.:' <mailto:tonynelson@georgeanelson.com>
' <http://www.georgeanelson.com/>
5:12 p.m.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-10-21 at 05:54 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Itamar Reis Peixoto <itamar <at> ispbrasil.com.br> writes:
>>> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>> Not exactly. It's mostly done, but at least critical fixes can still
>> get into the release for a couple more days.
>
> So... If we want a sneak peek at F8, how close is F8T3 plus all the
> Rawhide patches to the final version?
Very close. Maybe a dozen odd fixes apart.
Rahul
Is this fixed?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251493
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
5:20 p.m.
On 10/20/07, John Aldrich <john(a)chattanooga.net> wrote:
Is Fedora 8 still on schedule for release early November? I'm
still running
FC6, but I was thinking of upgrading to F7, however, if Fedora 8 is still
on-track for early November, I may just wait to upgrade.
My F8T3 install (which has not been updated) has 1265 packages
installed. 458 of them have updates, which is a significant portion.
I suspect very little is functional changes, mostly bug fixes.
5:30 p.m.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
John Summerfield wrote:
>
> Is this fixed?
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251493
I have no idea especially for what looks like a hardware specific bug.
If you have that hardware, get the latest rawhide torrent, test it and
report back as comments in the bugzilla report. It isn't marked as a
blocker or even a target. So unless it has already been fixed there
isn't any specific effort likely to go into it after the last test release.
Rahul
Oh. It was fixed in F7, exists in 7.9x. There's recent discussion in
Fedora-test
I don't do torrent - is there another way to get it?
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
5:35 p.m.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
John Summerfield wrote:
>>
> Oh. It was fixed in F7, exists in 7.9x. There's recent discussion in
> Fedora-test
>
> I don't do torrent - is there another way to get it?
You could install any of the older test/general release of Fedora and
yum update/upgrade. Fedora 8 Test 3 would be close.
http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/7.92/
Rahul
Oh. I should have said that it exists in 7.92.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
5:43 p.m.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> yum update/upgrade. Fedora 8 Test 3 would be close.
>>
>> http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/7.92/
>>
>> Rahul
>>
> Oh. I should have said that it exists in 7.92.
Yum update and see if the latest kernel fixes it and comment in the bug
report and adjust the release if not.
Rahul
I've added a note that it exists in test 3. It will be a while before I
can yum update, the install didn't do what I wanted (I wanted free space
at the start of the disk), so it's been erased.
I'm about ready to install again tho.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
7:01 p.m.
John Summerfield wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> yum update/upgrade. Fedora 8 Test 3 would be close.
>>>
>>> http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/publiclist/Fedora/7.92/
>>>
>>> Rahul
>>>
>> Oh. I should have said that it exists in 7.92.
>
> Yum update and see if the latest kernel fixes it and comment in the
> bug report and adjust the release if not.
>
> Rahul
>
I've added a note that it exists in test 3. It will be a while before I
can yum update, the install didn't do what I wanted (I wanted free space
at the start of the disk), so it's been erased.
I'm about ready to install again tho.
It's still present in 2.6.23.1-23.fc8
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
7:25 p.m.
John Summerfield wrote:
It's still present in 2.6.23.1-23.fc8
Following the reinstall, I've added this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=344761
Looks fairly important to me, my Windows system's not in the grub menu.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
Please do not reply off-list
5:10 p.m.
for me fc6 is too old and have more bugs than fc8 and fc7
--------------------
Itamar Reis Peixoto
e-mail/msn: itamar(a)ispbrasil.com.br
skype: itamarjp
icq: 81053601
+55 11 4063 5033
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Davidsen" <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
To: "For users of Fedora" <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: F8 ETA?
John Aldrich wrote:
> On Saturday 20 October 2007, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
>> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>>
> Great. Guess I'll wait to upgrade then. :-)
>
Based on FC6 and FC7, unless you like adventures I would wait until
about a month after the general release. I really don't want to leave
FC6, it is still easier to find software for it than FC7, and I want to
use the machine.
I did an FC8T3 test, and didn't see any reason to move on at the moment.
I wish fedoralegacy hadn't gone from support forever to no support, two
years is often enough to update production machines! I really like FC
better than Ubuntu, and RHEL/WhiteBox/CentOS are just a little too slow
to offer features.
Anyway, unless you have a good reason, I'd wait a bit for support and
zero-day "learning experiences" to happen to someone else.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list(a)redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
5:11 p.m.
On 30/10/2007, Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com> wrote:
Anyway, unless you have a good reason, I'd wait a bit for support
and
zero-day "learning experiences" to happen to someone else.
Imagine if everyone did that...
A different perspective is the following: OSS is a huge volunteer
effort. As an end user you don't pay for it. You're in no way obliged
to contribute anything, but, doesn't it seem fair to contribute when
you can? One way to contribute is byy trying software and reporting
when it doesn't work.
And the best bit is, with all the effort developers have put into
making it easy to run a new release of Fedora wiothout hosing your
current installation, the barrier to doing that is much lower - simply
download a live image, boot from that, and report anything that
breaks, if it does break.
If not, you know you're safe to install it as your full time OS.
The "I'll wait until other people iron out the bugs" is a little
selfish, in my opinion.
Jonathan.
5:16 p.m.
John Aldrich wrote:
On Saturday 20 October 2007, Itamar Reis Peixoto wrote:
> the f8 is done, but iso images will be released on november.
>
Great. Guess I'll wait to upgrade then. :-)
Based on FC6 and FC7, unless you like adventures I would wait until
about a month after the general release. I really don't want to leave
FC6, it is still easier to find software for it than FC7, and I want to
use the machine.
I did an FC8T3 test, and didn't see any reason to move on at the moment.
I wish fedoralegacy hadn't gone from support forever to no support, two
years is often enough to update production machines! I really like FC
better than Ubuntu, and RHEL/WhiteBox/CentOS are just a little too slow
to offer features.
Anyway, unless you have a good reason, I'd wait a bit for support and
zero-day "learning experiences" to happen to someone else.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
5:19 p.m.
The "I'll wait until other people iron out the bugs" is
a little
selfish, in my opinion.
Jonathan.
It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
beta test for Redhat?'
..hoping not to start a war, just want a straight answer.
5:41 p.m.
Tim Alberts wrote:
> The "I'll wait until other people iron out the bugs" is a little
> selfish, in my opinion.
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it
just prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality
or just beta test for Redhat?'
..hoping not to start a war, just want a straight answer.
No war and heck you do what you can to help. I will d/l f8 when it
is available and I will get it to work. I will not load it on top of my
well running f7. I have a lot of space. For sure my computer has all
Nvidia products so I can report on f8 performance on it.
--
Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
6:51 p.m.
Tim Alberts <talberts(a)msiscales.com> writes:
> The "I'll wait until other people iron out the
bugs" is a little
> selfish, in my opinion.
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it
just prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality
or just beta test for Redhat?'
..hoping not to start a war, just want a straight answer.
If you are running servers upon which you or your company depend for
reliability and revenue AND where you need a multi-year support
window, then run either RHEL or CENTOS. The former comes with paid
support, the latter is a "community" based version of RHEL. Both are
designed for high availability and longer term stability. Something
which most SysAdmins demand.
My company runs RHEL on all of our servers and several of us run
Fedora on the desktop.
Fedora is fine and I have been running it and it's RH predcessors for
a number of years. However, given the philosophy behind Fedora (much
like Ubuntu), you must be willing to ride the fast train and put up with
the periodic toe-stubbing that will inevitably take place using a
leading edge, rapid development approach.
If you are not willing or don't have the time to upgrade to each new
version or perhaps every other version, then Fedora is not for you.
Fedora Legacy was a noble attempt, but in the end, a waste of
resources (both human and financial) that could have been put to
better use on Fedora itself.
The bottom line is determine your functional requirements and find a
distribution that meets them as best as possible. That may or may not
be Fedora.
HTH,
Marc Schwartz
8:23 p.m.
Tim Alberts wrote:
> The "I'll wait until other people iron out the bugs" is a little
> selfish, in my opinion.
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
beta test for Redhat?'
..hoping not to start a war, just want a straight answer.
I've been flamed before, but I still say Fedora's a rolling beta.
I'm moderately happy to use it on unimportant machines, such as my
desktop maybe (but then it's actually tunning tikanga-clone, but not for
something like a server, where a bad kernel update can bring the place down.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
Please do not reply off-list
10:47 a.m.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: F8 ETA?
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: 10/30/2007 03:16 PM
<snip>
I wish fedoralegacy hadn't gone from support forever to no support, two
years is often enough to update production machines! I really like FC
better than Ubuntu, and RHEL/WhiteBox/CentOS are just a little too slow
to offer features.
Agreed, many production servers have a long upgrade requirement. Lets
define "production server" though. In particular, it is a *server* not a
*workstation*. It chugs along every day doing what it did the day
before. Not much excitement or need for new features for the poor lonely
server. It is happiest in a stable, working, static environment.
Workstations, on the other hand, have people attached to them. The
wetware component is impatient, inquisitive and exploratory. The old
gets old fast and the new is generally a welcome relief from what was
yesterday's new toy. We do, however hate broken toys.
The human part of a workstation wants applications that work and show
regular and perceivable improvements. Servers don't care if they are
working better or not. They just work.
This separation of function is why there are more than one choice in
distributions. If you are running a production server on Fedora you are
simply using the wrong tool. The personality of Fedora more closely
reflects the workstation mentality. It can be a proving ground for new
technologies in a server environment but, IMHO, should *never* be used
in a production environment.
So, the statement of support for *production machines* used in the same
breath as *Fedora* is simply a misuse of technology.
12:05 p.m.
On Wednesday October 31 2007 11:47:05 am Paul Lemmons wrote:
So, the statement of support for *production machines* used in
the same breath as *Fedora* is simply a misuse of technology.
In my view, you're view is nonsense.
It's your view, for your needs, and that's fine.
Why do you have a felt need to apply a blanket to the whole
community of users based on your perceived needs?
That's where you lost me.
There's someone on this list who is running a cluster of 1000
Fedora boxes in a production environment, as I recall, for a
government agency; why Fedora? As I recall, it had something to
do with a specific driver requirement, or something _like_
that... There are others. I run two Fedora servers in a
production environment, myself.
I could tend to agree with much of what you say until you get so
damn categorical -
But, what this has to do with the ETA of F8, I'm not sure...you
just struck a nerve with that comment above.
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
12:47 p.m.
on 10/31/2007 1:05 PM, Claude Jones wrote:
On Wednesday October 31 2007 11:47:05 am Paul Lemmons wrote:
> So, the statement of support for *production machines* used in
> the same breath as *Fedora* is simply a misuse of technology.
In my view, you're view is nonsense.
It's your view, for your needs, and that's fine.
Why do you have a felt need to apply a blanket to the whole
community of users based on your perceived needs?
That's where you lost me.
There's someone on this list who is running a cluster of 1000
Fedora boxes in a production environment, as I recall, for a
government agency; why Fedora? As I recall, it had something to
do with a specific driver requirement, or something _like_
that... There are others. I run two Fedora servers in a
production environment, myself.
I could tend to agree with much of what you say until you get so
damn categorical -
But, what this has to do with the ETA of F8, I'm not sure...you
just struck a nerve with that comment above.
If I read it correctly the ETA of F8 is on schedule. Or was this morning.
Whatever they were having a problem with has to be solved by tonight and
they sounded hopeful. Otherwise? + one week.
I think that you are going to like Fedora 8.
--
David
1:11 p.m.
Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007:
It's certainly not selfish if you want run production
servers...it just
prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
beta test for Redhat?'
You question implies there are only those two options available, which
might not be true. In this case your question would be inane.
I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor
would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on.
I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was
the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough.
..hoping not to start a war, just want a straight answer.
Well, straight answers - that's only for mathematicians. ;)
--
bye,
Adalbert
And ever has it been known that love knows not its own depth until the
hour of separation. -- Kahlil Gibran
4:14 p.m.
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 19:11 +0100, Adalbert Prokop wrote:
Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007:
> It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
> prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
> beta test for Redhat?'
You question implies there are only those two options available, which
might not be true. In this case your question would be inane.
I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor
would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on.
I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was
the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough.
Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta
stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially
Fedora Core 6.
Of course, I look more at it as a "technology preview" rather than beta,
but I'm weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Principal Engineer rstevens(a)internap.com -
- CDN Systems, Internap, Inc. http://www.internap.com -
- -
- Admitting you have a problem is the first step toward getting -
- medicated for it. -- Jim Evarts (http://www.TopFive.com) -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4:20 p.m.
Rick Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 19:11 +0100, Adalbert Prokop wrote:
> Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007:
>
>> It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
>> prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
>> beta test for Redhat?'
> You question implies there are only those two options available, which
> might not be true. In this case your question would be inane.
>
> I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor
> would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on.
> I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was
> the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough.
Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta
stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially
Fedora Core 6.
Of course, I look more at it as a "technology preview" rather than beta,
but I'm weird.
There is in fact a 6 month or so long beta process for RHEL for every
major release and a smaller beta period for minor releases. A recent
update for example,
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6512580671.html
Rahul
4:51 p.m.
On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 02:50 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Rick Stevens wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 19:11 +0100, Adalbert Prokop wrote:
>> Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007:
>>
>>> It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
>>> prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
>>> beta test for Redhat?'
>> You question implies there are only those two options available, which
>> might not be true. In this case your question would be inane.
>>
>> I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor
>> would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on.
>> I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was
>> the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough.
>
> Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta
> stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially
> Fedora Core 6.
>
> Of course, I look more at it as a "technology preview" rather than beta,
> but I'm weird.
There is in fact a 6 month or so long beta process for RHEL for every
major release and a smaller beta period for minor releases. A recent
update for example,
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6512580671.html
I didn't realize that. Ok, I stand (sit) corrected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Principal Engineer rstevens(a)internap.com -
- CDN Systems, Internap, Inc. http://www.internap.com -
- -
- First Law of Work: -
- If you can't get it done in the first 24 hours, work nights. -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5:59 p.m.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 14:14:59 -0700,
Rick Stevens <rstevens(a)internap.com> wrote:
Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta
stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially
Fedora Core 6.
You might want to note this announcement of a beta release of RHEL:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-announce/2007-July/msg00000.html
9:32 p.m.
Rick Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 19:11 +0100, Adalbert Prokop wrote:
> Tim Alberts wrote on Tuesday 30 October 2007:
>
>> It's certainly not selfish if you want run production servers...it just
>> prompts the question (yet again), 'is Fedora production quality or just
>> beta test for Redhat?'
> You question implies there are only those two options available, which
> might not be true. In this case your question would be inane.
>
> I would neither assume Fedora being RedHat's *beta* playing ground nor
> would I use it for a server, which I *must* rely on.
> I use it as my workstation OS and for my home server - I think that was
> the goal of Fedora and it does it job fair enough.
Actually, Fedora _is_ the beta stuff for RHEL. There is no RHEL beta
stuff...it's either RHEL or it's Fedora. Example: RHEL5 is essentially
Fedora Core 6.
RHEL does have betas, go look at the list of mailing lists.
Of course, I look more at it as a "technology preview" rather than beta,
but I'm weird.
As you wish. Essentially, Fedora users are part of the test and
evaluation program.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
Please do not reply off-list
9:38 p.m.
Paul Lemmons wrote:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: F8 ETA?
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: 10/30/2007 03:16 PM
> <snip>
> I wish fedoralegacy hadn't gone from support forever to no support,
> two years is often enough to update production machines! I really like
> FC better than Ubuntu, and RHEL/WhiteBox/CentOS are just a little too
> slow to offer features.
Agreed, many production servers have a long upgrade requirement. Lets
define "production server" though. In particular, it is a *server* not a
*workstation*. It chugs along every day doing what it did the day
before. Not much excitement or need for new features for the poor lonely
server. It is happiest in a stable, working, static environment.
You need to define "production" too. A software developer might have a
different view from that of a provider of online financial services. The
former might thin Fedora 8 the ideal server offering for its production
work, simply because it needs the latest features to develop and test
against. Someone targetting RHEL6 should be using F8, if not today, then
certainly tomorrow.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
Please do not reply off-list
11:40 p.m.
On Wed October 31 2007, David Boles wrote:
I think that you are going to like Fedora 8.
got T3 up on a testbed today -- it does have a new sheen to it
didn't get to do much - only thing I didn't like was the automatic updates
thing - I tried to bring Pirut up to start customizing as soon as it came up,
and it clashed with the instance of the package manager already running to
check for updates - it's a small thing, probably easily configured to taste
--
Claude Jones
Brunswick, MD, USA
5:27 p.m.
New subject: Fedora Philosophy - (Was F8 ETA?)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: F8 ETA?
From: John Summerfield <debian(a)herakles.homelinux.org>
To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
Date: 10/31/2007 07:38 PM
Paul Lemmons wrote:
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: F8 ETA?
> From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen(a)tmr.com>
> To: For users of Fedora <fedora-list(a)redhat.com>
> Date: 10/30/2007 03:16 PM
> > <snip>
>> I wish fedoralegacy hadn't gone from support forever to no support,
>> two years is often enough to update production machines! I really
>> like FC better than Ubuntu, and RHEL/WhiteBox/CentOS are just a
>> little too slow to offer features.
>
> Agreed, many production servers have a long upgrade requirement. Lets
> define "production server" though. In particular, it is a *server* not
> a *workstation*. It chugs along every day doing what it did the day
> before. Not much excitement or need for new features for the poor
> lonely server. It is happiest in a stable, working, static environment.
>
You need to define "production" too. A software developer might have a
different view from that of a provider of online financial services. The
former might thin Fedora 8 the ideal server offering for its production
work, simply because it needs the latest features to develop and test
against. Someone targeting RHEL6 should be using F8, if not today, then
certainly tomorrow.
I think I did...
What you describe is a production *workstation* for developers. Not a
production *server*. Developers have clearly different needs that
include a more current and possibly less stable environment. I would
also say that the developer's workstation would have a short update
period so that it could stay current. My workstation fits that category.
I know I am stepping on toes here but I get a little frustrated
sometimes. There are literally dozens of distributions out there. Each
is differentiated from the other by philosophy not technology. The
technological differences are only there because of the philosophical
differences. Each distribution tries to meet some specific need. I have
some preferences based on how closely those philosophically choices
align with my goals.
The Fedora project does not pretend to be *production server* centric.
It does not even pretend to be *production server* friendly. The
personality of the Fedora project is fast paced, (b)leading edge,
leaving the past behind quickly. It is a great proving ground or test
bed for current technologies. It is fun. It will never have the
stability or extended support that a server class distribution does.
To expect differently is like expecting Microsoft to adopt the FOSS
philosophy because you want them to. I choose not to use Microsoft
because their chosen paradigm does not align with what I want. The same
applies to Gentoo and Debian. I choose Fedora because it does. I also
choose CentOS and RHES and apply each distribution to the need it is
best suited for.
If Fedora does not match what you are looking for in a distribution,
there are lots of choices out there. Choose the one that does.
6:48 p.m.
Claude Jones wrote:
On Wed October 31 2007, David Boles wrote:
> I think that you are going to like Fedora 8.
got T3 up on a testbed today -- it does have a new sheen to it
didn't get to do much - only thing I didn't like was the automatic updates
thing - I tried to bring Pirut up to start customizing as soon as it came up,
and it clashed with the instance of the package manager already running to
check for updates - it's a small thing, probably easily configured to taste
It happens too often that I can't run yum from the command line, even
for enquiries.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa(a)coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
Please do not reply off-list
6019
days inactive
6030
days old
38 comments
20 participants
participants (20)
-
Adalbert Prokop -
Aly Dharshi -
Andrew Parker -
Bill Davidsen -
Bruno Wolff III -
Christopher A. Williams -
Claude Jones -
David -
itamar -
John Aldrich -
John Summerfield -
Jonathan Underwood -
Karl Larsen -
Kevin Kofler -
Marc Schwartz -
Paul Lemmons -
Rahul Sundaram -
Rick Stevens -
Tim Alberts -
Tony Nelson