Hot off the presses!
----- Forwarded message from Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com -----
From: Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com To: fedora-announce-list@redhat.com, fedora-devel-announce@redhat.com, fedora-test-list@redhat.com Organization: Red Hat Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:12:14 -0700 Cc: Subject: Cambridge (F-10) Beta release announcement X-BeenThere: fedora-test-list@redhat.com
Fedora 10 Beta: Cambridge's foundations are laid
Just on the heels of the Fedora Project's fifth anniversary, the Beta of Fedora Linux version 10 (code-named Cambridge) is now available:
http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease
There is also a Beta contest! Test five things in the Beta that are important to you as a user. If you find a bug *and* report it, you get the free attention of a package maintainer on a problem personally important to you!
Do your part to make Fedora 10 that much better.
Among the new, fun, and interesting features:
* New NetworkManager with connection sharing * Improved printer handling * Remote virtualization and easier virt storage * Sectool, an auditing and security testing framework * RPM 4.6, the first big RPM change in several years
... and more ...
* New version of PackageKit for managing software, with more fixes and enhancements (which benefits all distributions) * New version of PulseAudio (which benefits all distributions) * Kernel 2.6.27, including better support for WiFi * Better support for the EFI for Apple Macintosh hardware * Faster graphical start-up by Plymouth, replacing the venerable RHGB * Better support for webcams through the hard work in kernel 2.6.27 (which benefits all distributions) * New icon theme "Echo", to be completed with the theme graphic "Solar" in the Fedora 10 release * Gnome 2.24 * KDE 4.1 * Adding the NetBeans IDE * Eclipse 3.4 * Automatic installation of multimedia codecs * Better HDTV support in X.org * "Sugar" graphical environment (from OLPC) available for use, testing, and development
A more complete list and details of each new cited feature is available:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/10/FeatureList
For release information, including common and known bugs, please see our release notes:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/10/Beta/ReleaseNotes
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com wrote:
Hot off the presses!
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com wrote:
Hot off the presses!
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
... because as past discussions in this list have shown, many are not even subscribed to fedora announce list. We need all the feedback we can get.
Rahul
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:30 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
Seconded! It's an annoying pain getting *unnecessary* duplicates. Let those who want to know about it, join the announce list. Let those who don't bother to find out about the lists do without. You may as well ditch the announce list if you're going to duplicate every post on this one.
With the logic behind the "we want to inform more users" mentality, why not forward the developer list to this list, too? And all the other lists...
It's about time this list has a regular FAQ auto-posted. You could include things like links to how to use the mailing list, pointers to prepared answers on the wiki to over-asked FAQs, and if you want more information, join the announce list.
Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:30 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
Seconded! It's an annoying pain getting *unnecessary* duplicates. Let those who want to know about it, join the announce list. Let those who don't bother to find out about the lists do without. You may as well ditch the announce list if you're going to duplicate every post on this one.
With the logic behind the "we want to inform more users" mentality, why not forward the developer list to this list, too? And all the other lists...
It's about time this list has a regular FAQ auto-posted. You could include things like links to how to use the mailing list, pointers to prepared answers on the wiki to over-asked FAQs, and if you want more information, join the announce list.
Let's see.... There were total of 18 messages posted to the Announce list in the month of September. I think maybe 3~5 were forwarded to this list....and that number seems to be only due to the intrusion. Yeah, that increase in network traffic really bothers me. It just has to be stomped out. :-) :-)
Around 12:11pm on Thursday, October 02, 2008 (UK time), Ed Greshko scrawled:
Let's see.... There were total of 18 messages posted to the Announce list in the month of September. I think maybe 3~5 were forwarded to this list....and that number seems to be only due to the intrusion. Yeah, that increase in network traffic really bothers me. It just has to be stomped out. :-) :-)
Well I am with the people who find this anoying. Not because it happens with lots of messages, but because getting a message twice is just annoying.
The low quantity of messages on the Announce list can just goes to show why anyone who has an interest in this should be able to subscribe to the list without being swamped.
Steve
Steve Searle wrote:
Around 12:11pm on Thursday, October 02, 2008 (UK time), Ed Greshko scrawled:
Let's see.... There were total of 18 messages posted to the Announce list in the month of September. I think maybe 3~5 were forwarded to this list....and that number seems to be only due to the intrusion. Yeah, that increase in network traffic really bothers me. It just has to be stomped out. :-) :-)
Well I am with the people who find this anoying. Not because it happens with lots of messages, but because getting a message twice is just annoying.
Yeah, every once in a while my dad will forward an email with some cute animal on it that I'm sure he sent to me a week or so ago...maybe longer. It annoys me so much I can hardly find the delete key. :-) :-)
The low quantity of messages on the Announce list can just goes to show why anyone who has an interest in this should be able to subscribe to the list without being swamped.
Yeah, let's shoot the next person that dares send out an announcement that appears on some other list that everyone should also subscribe to. Heck, if those types aren't smart or informed enough to search out the lists and inform themselves they deserve to be left in the dark. :-)
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:55 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:30 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
Seconded! It's an annoying pain getting *unnecessary* duplicates. Let those who want to know about it, join the announce list. Let those who don't bother to find out about the lists do without.
So if you don't know about the lists you'll never find out about them? I know they are on the Fedora intro page, but does anyone read that?
You may as well ditch the announce list if you're going to duplicate every post on this one.
I haven't noticed a duplicate of every fedora-announce message on this list. In fact there are relatively few and I'd say an announcement of a new Fedora release is probably of interest to most people here.
It would be annoying if a lot of people did this of course. Possibly the best compromise would be to have announcements of new releases (and major things like the recent repo problem) sent here by the announcer as a matter of course, but this is something on which rational people are not going to agree on.
With the logic behind the "we want to inform more users" mentality, why not forward the developer list to this list, too? And all the other lists...
See above.
It's about time this list has a regular FAQ auto-posted. You could include things like links to how to use the mailing list, pointers to prepared answers on the wiki to over-asked FAQs, and if you want more information, join the announce list.
Energetically seconded :-)
poc
Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 09:30 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
Seconded! It's an annoying pain getting *unnecessary* duplicates. Let those who want to know about it, join the announce list. Let those who don't bother to find out about the lists do without. You may as well ditch the announce list if you're going to duplicate every post on this one.
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
The object is to have a low volume list to which people can subscribe if they suffer from a high per-byte cost, or low bandwidth, or low interest. It was originally created because lists like linux-kernel (and later this one) have a high volume.
The announce list is useful as a subset of other lists, not as one more damn list you need to read in order to follow developments. This is Fedora *general* and things here should be of general interest to people who care enough to wade through the volume, and what could be of higher general interest than a release notice?
With the logic behind the "we want to inform more users" mentality, why not forward the developer list to this list, too? And all the other lists...
You misunderstood the whole relationship between the lists, or perhaps the meaning of "general" and "announce." IMHO every announce important enough to post at all should go to both the announce group and the appropriate discussion group, with followup set to the discussion group.
It's about time this list has a regular FAQ auto-posted. You could include things like links to how to use the mailing list, pointers to prepared answers on the wiki to over-asked FAQs, and if you want more information, join the announce list.
That makes no sense at all... go to the low volume subset for more information.
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
Yeah, I really get annoyed when someone truly thinks they are being helpful and once in a blue moon they forward information they think is helpful and feel others may not have heard. :-) :-) Time to appoint a moderator to stem this tide. :-) :-)
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 10:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Yeah, I really get annoyed when someone truly thinks they are being helpful and once in a blue moon they forward information they think is helpful and feel others may not have heard. :-) :-) Time to appoint a moderator to stem this tide. :-) :-)
Now is the time to make sure that it doesn't become a tide, and that a certain person doesn't forward every single announcement about something. Seriously: Stop forwarding announcements. And the rest of you join the other list, too, if you want that extra information.
Maybe I'll just start forwarding any other bit of information that I feel people just ought to know about.
Tim wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 10:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Yeah, I really get annoyed when someone truly thinks they are being helpful and once in a blue moon they forward information they think is helpful and feel others may not have heard. :-) :-) Time to appoint a moderator to stem this tide. :-) :-)
Now is the time to make sure that it doesn't become a tide, and that a certain person doesn't forward every single announcement about something. Seriously: Stop forwarding announcements. And the rest of you join the other list, too, if you want that extra information.
It is a ripple in a pond. These lists have been around for more than a few years and it would have become a tidal wave by now if it were a real and not an imaginary problem.
More emails have passed here on this than forwarded announcements have in past 6 months....I suspect.
Maybe I'll just start forwarding any other bit of information that I feel people just ought to know about.
Sounds like a good idea. I feel you would make an informed decision on what the community may find interesting and they may have not heard about and may be of value to them. I've got 0 problem with that. And, guess what, that has happened in the past and I can't recall anyone jumping up and down and railing about it.
The last one I remember, maybe not spot on, is someone announcing an OSS mail system. There were a few "thank you" emails but I can't recall anyone objecting to it. Had it not been brought to my attention by that person I would never have known about it or checked it out. I think that is great.
This concept of everyone has to know about all the fedora lists and join them and never forward information from one list to another is just, IMHO, silly. Not to mention that no matter what FAQ are posted every month and no matter what *rules* and *regulations* are proclaimed there will always be new users that won't/haven't read them yet...or will think some of them silly and ignore them.... Some folks here act as if anarchy is breaking out and the whole world order is collapsing when someone top posts....
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 12:49 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
Tim wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 10:54 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
[...]
This concept of everyone has to know about all the fedora lists and join them and never forward information from one list to another is just, IMHO, silly. Not to mention that no matter what FAQ are posted every month and no matter what *rules* and *regulations* are proclaimed there will always be new users that won't/haven't read them yet...
Agreed up to here.
or will think some of them silly and ignore them....
In which case they should be called on it. Thinking a guideline (there are few if any "rules" here and no "regulations" I know of) is silly is a reason to propose an alternative, not simply to ignore it.
Some folks here act as if anarchy is breaking out and the whole world order is collapsing when someone top posts....
Top-posting, posting in HTML, quoting entire digests (and not editing quotes, which I admit most of us are guilty of from time to time) are real impediments. It's reasonable to draw attention to the guidelines when the poster clearly hasn't noticed them or has decided they don't apply to him.
poc
Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
or will think some of them silly and ignore them....
In which case they should be called on it. Thinking a guideline (there are few if any "rules" here and no "regulations" I know of) is silly is a reason to propose an alternative, not simply to ignore it.
My comment didn't suggest that they shouldn't be called on it. Simply that not everyone will agree to follow the guidelines. Heck, even if it is a law...just as the law against speeding...people will violate.
The vast majority of the posters here do follow the guidelines. Of the ones that don't, or didn't, were unaware and when informed, followed. Others think some just don't. Yet that number is small.
Some folks here act as if anarchy is breaking out and the whole world order is collapsing when someone top posts....
Top-posting, posting in HTML, quoting entire digests (and not editing quotes, which I admit most of us are guilty of from time to time) are real impediments. It's reasonable to draw attention to the guidelines when the poster clearly hasn't noticed them or has decided they don't apply to him.
I guess I just don't buy in to these things being "real" impediments. Top posting doesn't happen all that much and even when it does it is very easy to ignore. Sometimes I feel that this HTML battle is simply a desire to wear a "geek" badge. "I'm a geek...we only use plain text". If I were to anything a "real" impediment it would be posts without a descriptive subject...."Help Me". Yet it doesn't imped me....but may imped the author since some of us will simply skip those posts.
Yet, either way, I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't mention it....but they also shouldn't go all bonkers if their suggestions are ignored. I am also an advocate of mentioning the "infraction" to the OPs *off-list*.
Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
In general I would think that any post to announce probably should be copied to the general list. The announce really should be a subset of general, not a disconnected conversation. So perhaps the original fault was that the announce didn't go to the general list, and someone fixed it.
People who wade through this list are unlikely to (a) be bothered by a few posts with important information, and (b) probably don't want to have to go read yet another list to catch announcements.
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 12:09 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
Too many things annoy you. When I have done this it was because people had complained that important information had been missed on the announce-list. -- ======================================================================= Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep, If I should die before I wake, I'll cry in anguish, "Mistake!! Mistake!!" ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: Konstance@sbcglobal.net
Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 12:09 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
Too many things annoy you. When I have done this it was because people had complained that important information had been missed on the announce-list.
--
Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep, If I should die before I wake, I'll cry in anguish, "Mistake!! Mistake!!" ======================================================================= Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: Konstance@sbcglobal.net
Amen, Amen Aaron.
Aaron Konstam wrote:
On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 12:09 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 19:36 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I don't think you understand why there *IS* an announce list...
I do. I don't think some others do, though...
If the announcement was worth sending to both lists, the announcement can be (and sometimes is - look at the headers for some). What I find really annoying is someone *else* who decides that they should go about forwarding from one list to another.
Too many things annoy you. When I have done this it was because people had complained that important information had been missed on the announce-list.
Actually I think we agree here. My thought is that announcements should initially go to both the general and announce list, and if the O.P. doesn't do that I have no complaint about a forward. It's the forwarding to unrelated lists, and duplicate forwarding by multiple people, which seen unnecessary.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
Why forward publicly accessibly messages from one list to another within the same community?
I look at it from a different perspective: I think the -announce list is a low-traffic list that only re-posts announcements from the -discuss list that should be read by all. I'd prefer the -announce list as a subset of -discuss. I've seen it work that way in several other communities and think it's helpful. Reposting announcements to discuss automatically creates the discussion thread that an announcement might kick off.
Paul W. Frields wrote:
Hot off the presses!
----- Forwarded message from Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com -----
From: Jesse Keating jkeating@redhat.com To: fedora-announce-list@redhat.com, fedora-devel-announce@redhat.com, fedora-test-list@redhat.com Organization: Red Hat Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:12:14 -0700 Cc: Subject: Cambridge (F-10) Beta release announcement X-BeenThere: fedora-test-list@redhat.com
Fedora 10 Beta: Cambridge's foundations are laid
Just on the heels of the Fedora Project's fifth anniversary, the Beta of Fedora Linux version 10 (code-named Cambridge) is now available:
http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease
There is also a Beta contest! Test five things in the Beta that are important to you as a user. If you find a bug *and* report it, you get the free attention of a package maintainer on a problem personally important to you!
Do your part to make Fedora 10 that much better.
Among the new, fun, and interesting features:
* New NetworkManager with connection sharing * Improved printer handling * Remote virtualization and easier virt storage * Sectool, an auditing and security testing framework * RPM 4.6, the first big RPM change in several years... and more ...
* New version of PackageKit for managing software, with more fixes and enhancements (which benefits all distributions) * New version of PulseAudio (which benefits all distributions) * Kernel 2.6.27, including better support for WiFi
Any chance of getting support for the Atheros L1E NIC in there? The Linux driver comes with the ASUS P5Q-SE/R board, for their "Express" Linux, and appears to be GPL. The reviews on the Newegg site say that OpenSuSE-11 supports the NIC out of the box, so if the license is okay perhaps Fedora users won't have to hand build a kernel.
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Any chance of getting support for the Atheros L1E NIC in there? The Linux driver comes with the ASUS P5Q-SE/R board, for their "Express" Linux, and appears to be GPL. The reviews on the Newegg site say that OpenSuSE-11 supports the NIC out of the box, so if the license is okay perhaps Fedora users won't have to hand build a kernel.
It is in upstream 2.6.27 kernel so basically all distributions should support it at this point. Try it out and if it doesn't then file bug reports.
Rahul
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Bill Davidsen wrote:
Any chance of getting support for the Atheros L1E NIC in there? The Linux driver comes with the ASUS P5Q-SE/R board, for their "Express" Linux, and appears to be GPL. The reviews on the Newegg site say that OpenSuSE-11 supports the NIC out of the box, so if the license is okay perhaps Fedora users won't have to hand build a kernel.
It is in upstream 2.6.27 kernel so basically all distributions should support it at this point. Try it out and if it doesn't then file bug reports.
I posted that note after trying the FC10 beta net_install CD, which I thought had 2.6.27-rc7 as the base. That was the x86_64 version, I am pulling the i686 version at the moment for install tomorrow on the same system.
I selected the rescue mode, and answered YES to network enable, and the network didn't come up. I'll check again tomorrow, the FC9 install has multiple problems with that motherboard, so I don't mind installing several times if needed.
Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't look for the driver, just assumed that no network meant no driver. I can believe the installer may be a bit rough, NP. ;-)
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 04:52:02PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Any chance of getting support for the Atheros L1E NIC in there? The Linux driver comes with the ASUS P5Q-SE/R board, for their "Express" Linux, and appears to be GPL. The reviews on the Newegg site say that OpenSuSE-11 supports the NIC out of the box, so if the license is okay perhaps Fedora users won't have to hand build a kernel.
I don't know anything about that particular driver, but a quick Google search for "linux atheros l1e" shows me patches submitted to the 2.6.25.3+ kernel. It may be there now. Have you tried the Fedora 10 Beta to see what happens?
Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 04:52:02PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Any chance of getting support for the Atheros L1E NIC in there? The Linux driver comes with the ASUS P5Q-SE/R board, for their "Express" Linux, and appears to be GPL. The reviews on the Newegg site say that OpenSuSE-11 supports the NIC out of the box, so if the license is okay perhaps Fedora users won't have to hand build a kernel.
I don't know anything about that particular driver, but a quick Google search for "linux atheros l1e" shows me patches submitted to the 2.6.25.3+ kernel. It may be there now. Have you tried the Fedora 10 Beta to see what happens?
Yes, thanks. The most recent FC9 kernel also seems to include that patch, and the systems with the ASUS "P5Q SE/R" board work well.
I have not had any luck yet getting the video working in FC10 on bare hardware. I did do an install on KVM, which works if you ignore the lack of xorg.conf (I know, new X) and a choice of resolutions limited to 800x600 and no obvious way to increase it. I tried the default video and the "-std-vga" option, for simple testing that is adequate.
I will eventually try FC10 on other hardware, it's beta and I don't live or die by it, FC9 working really well for me other than one laptop.
-
Aaron Konstam -
Arthur Pemberton -
Bill Davidsen -
Ed Greshko -
Jim -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Paul W. Frields -
Rahul Sundaram -
Rahul Sundaram -
Steve Searle -
Ted Roche -
Tim