FC4 feature list?

Sat Jun 11 22:19:24 UTC 2005

Tony Nelson wrote:

>At 9:01 AM -0700 6/11/05, Karsten Wade wrote:
>  
>
>>Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
>>	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
>>	boundary="=-pucgnvM1g3z+Q+ket2ma"
>>
>>On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 00:50 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Release notes will be available in an hour or so here:
>>>http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/
>>>      
>>>
>>It took a little longer than an hour, but the release notes are
>>available now.
>>
>>This is the one that we are releasing in an updated errata, which is the
>>one being translated:
>>
>>http://fedora.redhat.com/docs/release-notes/fc4/errata/
>>    
>>
>
>Release notes are good.
>
>As Colin Adams says, the page looks odd unless I select UTF-8.
>  
>

This should be fixed soon.

>What is the difference between the release notes and the errata?  The pages
>look about the same to me.err
>
>  
>
Yes. The errata is provided as a place for important updates after the 
release has been made or corrections in it. Currently it does have some 
differences if you read it carefully

>Some things in the release notes are unclear.  If they should be reported
>somewhere else, someone here will let me know.  In any event, I'll learn
>something from the discussion (or flaming).
>  
>

The errata release notes provides this link http://tinyurl.com/al5g4 for 
filing bug reports. If you would like to initiate a discussion or 
provide feedback on the release notes or any other Fedora documentation, 
fedora docs list (CC'ing this reply) is the best place now. We might 
have a separate list for release notes in the near future but we havent 
decided on that yet. I do read this list but this is a high traffic one 
and not everyone working on the documentation is subscribed to this list 
or following any discussions related to it here.

>1.1  Gnome is now 2.10.  I read that wrong for a while, as 2.1.0, and was
>confused.  If this is happening much, it might be worth spelling it out as
>well, "two point ten".
>  
>
Potentially a good idea. Would have to careful not to overdo it

>5.2  When mediacheck says a disk is faulty, but says it is OK when one
>boots the installer with ide=nodma, should the installation be done with
>ide=nodma or without?
>
>  
>
Installation can proceed without this option. Using this option would 
probably slow down the installation. Using the sha1sum and burning on 
slower speeds is pretty reliable

>How does one use sha1sum?  From the installation process, or by booting an
>existing linux installation and running it there?  (I.e., from where the
>CDs were burned.)
>  
>

same as md5sum. Run it on the ISO image and check this page 
http://fedora.redhat.com/download after the release is made. Windows 
users could use the following link which also contains the rationale for 
switching over to sha1sum from previously used md5sum checks

http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-ru/2004-December/000158.html

Note: I havent tried the Windows version. There might be better options 
out there

>5.3  Re. third party package conflicts during upgrades, does the installer
>detect the problem and warn about it?  If not, what is a good way to find
>them before installing, other than remembering every package installed and
>just knowing which ones have conflicts?
>  
>
No. The installer overrides it if you have a conflicting package. 
Solutions to this are pretty tricky. I would suggest relying on official 
repositories whenever possible and check whether your packages are 
working properly immediately after the installation. An rpm query on the 
packager could potentially be used before or after the installation can 
be used to find out which ones arent provided by Fedora. There are other 
naming conventions which can be helpful too. As an example Rpmforge 
repository using the "rf" tag and dag repository uses "dag" (duh!) for 
easy identification.

>Re. Ximian Gnome (which I don't use), when the notes say "immediately" do
>they mean during the installations (when?) or during the first boot (from
>runlevel 3?)?
>  
>
After the installation. Run level really doesnt matter.

>6.1.2  Does one need to edit the kernel command line to include audit=1 in
>order for auditd to be "enabled by default"?  Or is it already enabled, and
>"auditing within the kernel" is something else that can also be enabled?
>  
>
As I understand it, the audit daemon is enabled by default but you need 
to enable the kernel part of it explicitly (probably due to performance 
hits) either during boot time (audit =1) or for the session (*auditctl 
-e 1)*

>6.1.4  Is alocate used by Actions -> Search for Files?  (Apparantly yes.)
>  
>
I dont think gnome-search-tool using slocate. It is not a build 
dependency. It doesnt seem to be linked to the binary (ldd). Its not 
mentioned in the help file either

>It seems odd that it isn't enabled by default.  I expect that there will be
>much confusion (as well as some disk savings) from this.  Hopefully Search
>for Files will automatically inform users of the problem.  I think the FC4
>release notes should mention the dependency.
>  
>
One of the reasons for disabling slocate cron (updatedb) by default is 
that we are currently investigating more intelligent and efficient 
methods to do this. See "Audit-layer based slocate replacement" in 
Fedora bounties for a feasible alternative

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraBounties

>6.2.2.3  Step 1:  does up2date --get-source kernel work on FC4?  It doesn't
>work for me on FC3, with a 404 Not Found error for some header.info page.
>  
>
You are talking about 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=141289. I am not 
aware whether it has been fixed in FC4 or not

>Step 3:  the command "cd/usr/src/redhat/BUILD/ikernel-<version> /usr/src/"
>seems odd to me, having two directories on it.
>
>  
>
Good time for a release notes errata I guess ;-)

regards
Rahul