transition from red hat 9 to fedora

[George Alexeief]

As a very happy RH9 user, I was also a little worried about what
switching to Fedora will mean -- instability? No support? From what I
gather so far, it seems that Fedora Core will fill the gap that RH9's
death will create.
And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter
what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.

[jdw]

George Alexeief wrote:
> As a very happy RH9 user, I was also a little worried about what
> switching to Fedora will mean -- instability? No support? From what I
> gather so far, it seems that Fedora Core will fill the gap that RH9's
> death will create.
> And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter
> what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

I tried SUSE 9.0 and it didn't fill the void that not having RH9 would 
leave. It wouldn't support my graphics card, which RH9 does, so SUSE has 
a long ways to go before they can fill RH's shoes.

I must say that I believe Fedora is going to be a great distribution.

[Ryan J Zygar]

If only they could build in the drivers at the sites of _my_ graphic card so
I did't have to rebuild the kernel everytime the release one.

ATI Radeon 9600.

But ah well
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> On Behalf Of jdw
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 12:03 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: transition from red hat 9 to fedora
>
> George Alexeief wrote:
> > As a very happy RH9 user, I was also a little worried about what
> > switching to Fedora will mean -- instability? No support? From what I
> > gather so far, it seems that Fedora Core will fill the gap that RH9's
> > death will create.
> > And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter
> > what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.
> >
> > --
> > fedora-list mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>
> I tried SUSE 9.0 and it didn't fill the void that not having RH9 would
> leave. It wouldn't support my graphics card, which RH9 does, so SUSE has
> a long ways to go before they can fill RH's shoes.
>
> I must say that I believe Fedora is going to be a great distribution.
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

[Mike A. Harris]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ryan J. Zygar wrote:
> If only they could build in the drivers at the sites of _my_ graphic card so
> I did't have to rebuild the kernel everytime the release one.
>
> ATI Radeon 9600.
>
> But ah well

Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.

To date, I've received only a couple of minor bug reports.  I 
don't see any bug reports in bugzilla with your email address on 
them either.

The current driver supports most ATI Radeon and FireGL hardware, 
with the exception of a few of the latest chips released.  I 
don't get anywhere near half as much information and feedback 
from people having problems that I'd _like_ to get, and so I add 
support for new chips in a conservative manner which isn't likely 
to break the driver while adding new hardware support.

Since there is not a massive assault of bug reports and RFEs in
bugzilla about missing Radeon hardware support, I can't exactly
classify this work as super high priority work to do with my Red
Hat on my head.  It is high priority for my personal spare time
as a volunteer, but even that time is consumed by many things.

Complain about missing support if you like, but it will remain 
"missing support" unless there are *POLITE* bug reports in 
bugzilla detailing the problem, and including X server log, 
config file, and other information.

Support gets added as I have time, and as I receive feedback from
people.  Also, overly negative feedback or complaining isn't a
huge motivator to drop what I'm doing and spend my
Saturday/Sunday updating a video driver.  I'd rather watch a DVD 
or go out for the weekend....

[Ryan J Zygar]

Goodness I apologize.
Sorry bro. I will go over this this afternoon. And reload it I didn't
realize it. I will let you know ASAP.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Ryan Zygar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
> On Behalf Of Mike A. Harris
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 12:40 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: transition from red hat 9 to fedora
>
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ryan J. Zygar wrote:
> > If only they could build in the drivers at the sites of _my_ graphic card
>
> so
> > I did't have to rebuild the kernel everytime the release one.
> >
> > ATI Radeon 9600.
> >
> > But ah well
>
> Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own
> personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from
> XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my
> own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these
> mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and
> to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.
>
> To date, I've received only a couple of minor bug reports.  I
> don't see any bug reports in bugzilla with your email address on
> them either.
>
> The current driver supports most ATI Radeon and FireGL hardware,
> with the exception of a few of the latest chips released.  I
> don't get anywhere near half as much information and feedback
> from people having problems that I'd _like_ to get, and so I add
> support for new chips in a conservative manner which isn't likely
> to break the driver while adding new hardware support.
>
> Since there is not a massive assault of bug reports and RFEs in
> bugzilla about missing Radeon hardware support, I can't exactly
> classify this work as super high priority work to do with my Red
> Hat on my head.  It is high priority for my personal spare time
> as a volunteer, but even that time is consumed by many things.
>
> Complain about missing support if you like, but it will remain
> "missing support" unless there are *POLITE* bug reports in
> bugzilla detailing the problem, and including X server log,
> config file, and other information.
>
> Support gets added as I have time, and as I receive feedback from
> people.  Also, overly negative feedback or complaining isn't a
> huge motivator to drop what I'm doing and spend my
> Saturday/Sunday updating a video driver.  I'd rather watch a DVD
> or go out for the weekend....
>
> --
> Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
> OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat
>
> --
> fedora-list mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

[Ben Russo]

Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ryan J. Zygar wrote:
> > If only they could build in the drivers at the sites of _my_ graphic card so
> > I did't have to rebuild the kernel everytime the release one.
> >
> > ATI Radeon 9600.
> >
> > But ah well
>
> Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
> personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
> XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
> own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
> mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
> to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.

THANKS MIKE!  KUDOS, GOOD JOB!

I love the new XF86 packages, they "just work" with my ATI Radeon 9000 
Mobility laptop chipset.   Autodetected during install, allowed me to 
set the
resolutions and color depths I wanted with no problems.
The accelerated stuff like Chromium and TuxRacer work well,
and the screen can go into "power save" mode (blank and backlight off)
just fine.    Love it.

BTW, support you whole heartedly, have a bugzilla account, but haven't
had problems that didn't already have ticket numbers (or that weren't 
big breaking
news anyway).

[Steve Withers]

On Thu, 2003-10-30 at 09:39, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Support gets added as I have time, and as I receive feedback from
> people.  Also, overly negative feedback or complaining isn't a
> huge motivator to drop what I'm doing and spend my
> Saturday/Sunday updating a video driver.  I'd rather watch a DVD 
> or go out for the weekend....

We love you at my house.

I don't know what those other bozos are moaning about. :-)

[Ted Kaczmarek]

Kudos from me, My Sager laptop is doing 1220 frames per second with Rage
Mobility 9000.

Excellent work :-)

Ted
On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 15:39, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ryan J. Zygar wrote:
> > If only they could build in the drivers at the sites of _my_ graphic card so
> > I did't have to rebuild the kernel everytime the release one.
> >
> > ATI Radeon 9600.
> >
> > But ah well
>
> Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
> personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
> XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
> own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
> mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
> to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.
>
> To date, I've received only a couple of minor bug reports.  I 
> don't see any bug reports in bugzilla with your email address on 
> them either.
>
> The current driver supports most ATI Radeon and FireGL hardware, 
> with the exception of a few of the latest chips released.  I 
> don't get anywhere near half as much information and feedback 
> from people having problems that I'd _like_ to get, and so I add 
> support for new chips in a conservative manner which isn't likely 
> to break the driver while adding new hardware support.
>
> Since there is not a massive assault of bug reports and RFEs in
> bugzilla about missing Radeon hardware support, I can't exactly
> classify this work as super high priority work to do with my Red
> Hat on my head.  It is high priority for my personal spare time
> as a volunteer, but even that time is consumed by many things.
>
> Complain about missing support if you like, but it will remain 
> "missing support" unless there are *POLITE* bug reports in 
> bugzilla detailing the problem, and including X server log, 
> config file, and other information.
>
> Support gets added as I have time, and as I receive feedback from
> people.  Also, overly negative feedback or complaining isn't a
> huge motivator to drop what I'm doing and spend my
> Saturday/Sunday updating a video driver.  I'd rather watch a DVD 
> or go out for the weekend....

[Dax Kelson]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
> personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
> XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
> own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
> mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
> to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.
>
> To date, I've received only a couple of minor bug reports.  I 
> don't see any bug reports in bugzilla with your email address on 
> them either.

Hey Mike, did you get that replacement 9800 card from ATI? Have you seen
any hangs on it?

I would love to test more, as I have a whole classroom with 9800s in it, 
but we have been so incredibly busy with increasing business and trying to 
hire more people that I've haven't had the time to bang on it.

Dax Kelson
Guru Labs

(writing this from a hotel room in Chicago, next week Houston, whee!)

[Mike A. Harris]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Dax Kelson wrote:
> > Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
> > personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
> > XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
> > own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
> > mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
> > to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.
> >
> > To date, I've received only a couple of minor bug reports.  I 
> > don't see any bug reports in bugzilla with your email address on 
> > them either.
>
> Hey Mike, did you get that replacement 9800 card from ATI?

Yep.
> Have you seen any hangs on it?

Haven't used it yet.  I've been working on two projects mainly 
nonstop.  I hope to get back to Radeon stuff sometime in November 
though.
> I would love to test more, as I have a whole classroom with
> 9800s in it, but we have been so incredibly busy with increasing
> business and trying to hire more people that I've haven't had
> the time to bang on it.

I hoped to do some fixes before Fedora froze, but I missed the 
cutoff date.  So now it's something that'll get done in rawhide 
hopefully in Nov, and get into future updates (if we even do 
updates), and in my own special repository if not.

Haven't been many ATI bug reports in bugzilla, so problems might 
be unique perhaps to certain setups or somesuch.  I hope to 
figure it all out soon though.  Just too bad there isn't 36 hours 
in a day.  ;o/

Take care,
TTYL

[Marcello Mezzanotti]

On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 18:39, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> Um, excuse me.  I spent half a weekend a few weeks ago, of my own 
> personal time backporting support for Radeon 9200/9600/9800 from 
> XFree86 CVS along with patches donated by ATI, and a bunch of my 
> own hacking efforts.  I have posted numerous times to these 
> mailing lists requesting people to TEST this new support out and 
> to REPORT BUGS and issues with hardware that does not detect yet.

excuse me, but i have a hp nx9005 notebook, my question is your xfree
package support ati igp320 mobility chipset?? if you need a beta for
this chipset i can do that

thanks
Marcello

[Jeffrey A Law]

In message , Marcello Mezzanott
i writes:
> excuse me, but i have a hp nx9005 notebook, my question is your xfree
> package support ati igp320 mobility chipset?? if you need a beta for
> this chipset i can do that

Well, I don't know about the 320, but the latest xfreee bits seem to be
supporting the igp340 and igp345 which are supposed to be derivatives of
the igp320.

Jeff

[bishop]

George Alexeief wrote:
> As a very happy RH9 user, I was also a little worried about what
> switching to Fedora will mean -- instability? No support? From what I
> gather so far, it seems that Fedora Core will fill the gap that RH9's
> death will create.

Me, I'm hoping that, with the little-bang releases every quarter, that 
some brave soul will push for apt-get/yum/WHATEVER;get-over-it 
upgradability between them, that people who didn't hand-roll anything 
could almost upgrade between one and the other remotely.  Some rumour 
suggested that a bunch of crazy Brasilians had this distro where they 
wanted to almost offer that.

Something that would allow me to keep my machine(s)in recent-release 
shape without forcing me to show up in person with a CD (and, for one of 
them, that's a plane trip) on scheduled access, that would be fabulous. 
  Yeah, it'd require some new testing, but, as a motivator to people so 
they keep their boxes up to date, it goes way better than an EOL notice. 
  Or, at least, that's what our field engs are saying at work.
> And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter
> what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.

Choose your distro wisely.  The implementation costs aren't counted in 
'low cost', of course, and, while we save on licenses, those 
implementation costs and development platform frustrations of the ~wrong 
distro can really ruin a day.

jdw wrote:
> I tried SUSE 9.0 and it didn't fill the void that not having RH9 would leave.

I think it's the only one with %{buildroot}="/" and very few 
BuildRequires listed as such.  THAT can be exciting, especially when, 
after rebuilding the kernel RPM on an installed machine out of 
completely different SRPMs, the machine stops booting.

jdw continued:
> I must say that I believe Fedora is going to be a great distribution.

I can't be so optimistic, but I will say it will probably be the best in 
a world after RH9, and one without CL to give FDR a good bit of 
competition.  Those Brasilians really grok Apt.

- bish

[Chuck Wolber]

> Something that would allow me to keep my machine(s)in recent-release
> shape without forcing me to show up in person with a CD (and, for one of
> them, that's a plane trip) on scheduled access, that would be fabulous.
>   Yeah, it'd require some new testing, but, as a motivator to people so
> they keep their boxes up to date, it goes way better than an EOL notice.
>   Or, at least, that's what our field engs are saying at work.

I did just that from 7.0 -> 7.1 -> 7.2 -> 7.3 on a whole fleet of
machines. Big whoop, I know... Aside from that glibc thing, it's actually
pretty easy to do across major releases as well. I haven't yet tried a 
major release upgrade remotely though (ie 8.0 -> 9).

-Chuck

[T. Ribbrock]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:55:50AM -0800, George Alexeief wrote:
[...]
> And if Fedora doesn't cut it, then there's always SuSe -- so no matter
> what, us low-cost Linux users will have somewhere to go.

Don't forget Mandrake. I never used RHL8 or RHL9 (I was waiting for
RHL8.2, which never materialized), so I'm still on RHL7.3 (one of the
best distros they ever made, IMO). Being interested in some of the
newer versions of some programs as well (and too lazy to build my own
RPMs for all of them...), I migrated two of my RHL7.3 boxes to MDK9.1.
I'm so happy with it that a third one will follow, while a fourth will
go to Fedora 1, as soon as it's released. And I'll probably keep one
RHL7.3 machine for the time being... :-)

Cheerio,

Thomas