From byte at aeon.com.my Tue Apr 12 07:36:42 2005 From: byte at aeon.com.my (Colin Charles) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:36:42 +1000 Subject: My Workstation OS of choice Message-ID: <1113291402.4917.305.camel@arena.soho.bytebot.net> http://os.newsforge.com/os/05/04/07/1341231.shtml?tid=2 Nice little plug for Fedora... -- Colin Charles, byte at aeon.com.my http://www.bytebot.net/ "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Apr 27 07:58:54 2005 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:28:54 +0530 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review Message-ID: <426F463E.7040105@redhat.com> Hi I came across your review [1] of the second test release of Fedora Core 4 . I have a few suggestions and remarks.This is the first review of a test release of Fedora Core 4 that I have come across and as such it was certainly a interesting one to read. "I am one of many who felt that Red Hat's abandonment of their desktop user community was treacherous at best. I see the logic in this from a customer support perspective--after all, answering questions from randoms who've coughed up the money for a Linux distribution at CompUSA can be time-consuming, but that's how you build market share." Stopping retail distribution of Red Hat Linux and moving towards a more frequently updated Fedora project isnt equivalent to abandonment of the desktop users. Red Hat has never produced a distribution that directly targetted the desktop segment. While its true that Red Hat wouldnt isnt directly involved in retail distribution of Fedora, independant vendors continue to do that extensively. Fedora release cycle combined with the Fedora legacy project would provide something thats pretty close yet better to previous releases of Red Hat Linux. While your point about building market share is pretty true the reality is that support costs would be higher for the desktop market compared to servers (limited and restricted usage scenarios). Red Hat continues to work on things that are meant to improve the user experience for Fedora. For example extensive work on GTK, dbus, hal and things like Network manager are some of the pieces of desktop infrastructure that springs up to mind. Efforts to improve bootup speed using bootchart [2] and things like GDM early login [3] are primarly for desktop users. servers arent going to rebooted that often for boot up speed to be a significant factor . right? Work on GCJ ( GNU compiler for Java) would enable the significant amount of Java code in Openoffice 2.0 to e run under a natively compiled free Java stack which I believe you would agree is a important thing for the desktop market. "On my screen, the subtitles read "To sponsor a project and people who will develop stuff that we can suck directly into future RHEL releases."" While Fedora project definitely is the basis of Red Hat Enteprise Linux, inviting the community to work on things is meant to enable more innovative growth and take Linux into directions which Red Hat cannot or does not want to work on currently. Fedora Extras is just one such direct benefit of the work done by the community. Instead of a scattered set of third party repositories we will now have Fedora Extras repository which follows Fedora Core release cycle and is enabled by default in Fedora Core 4 which will enable users to access a whole lot of software more easily You have provided a table that shows the changes in version numbers of the things that you find important. It would have been better to link to the release notes [4] for the test release for users who want to dig for further information after reading you review The following things are what I would consider important features that are planned to included in Fedora Core 4 that you have not mentioned in your review Xen [5] - A para virtualisation software that would enable users to run multiple operating systems or versions of it. Red Hat GFS [6] - Cluster filesystem SELinux update - Significant number of additional deamons will protected by SELinux in Fedora Core 4 Free Java stack which includes Eclipse and Apache Jakarta Fedora Extras yum repository enabled by default GDM early login and removal of rhgb would be a significant change in user experience for desktop users Evince document viewer [7] Yum will use sqllite database and perform much faster that previous releases regards Rahul [1] http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reviews/5830/1/ [2] bootchart.sf.net [3] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2005-April/msg00416.html [4] GDM early login - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraDocs_2fReleaseNotes_2fCore4Test2 [5] Xen - http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/ [6] Red Hat GFS - http://www.redhat.com/software/rha/gfs/ [7] Evince - http://www.gnome.org/projects/evince/ From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Apr 27 13:19:39 2005 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:49:39 +0530 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114599796.1257.45.camel@wvh.timesys.com> References: <426F463E.7040105@redhat.com> <1114599796.1257.45.camel@wvh.timesys.com> Message-ID: <426F916B.9030507@redhat.com> Hi >I am surprised about your comment that "Red Hat never produced a >distribution that directly targeted the desktop market." Prior to the >death of the Red Hat Linux line, it seems to me that in what you used to >ship - three distributions: standard, deluxe, and professional - the >standard version was clearly targeted at home and desktop users due to >its low price point and presence in every retail software shop. It seems >to me that saying that this was not targeted towards the desktop is >somewhat revisionist. > You definitely have a point there. I dont have any extensive knowledge of the above distributions but as I understand it those werent polished or geared up for desktop users. The key point is not tie up a means of distribution ( retail sales) to targetted market (desktop) > >Thanks for taking the time to read my review, and I'll look forward to >future Red Hat and Fedora Core release, as always. > I would love to read more of such articles including quick previews of test releases >I believe that you >were the one through whom I received the pre-release of RHEL 4.0 that I >also reviewed for LinuxPlanet a while ago, and hope to be able to >evaluate future versions of your products as well. > No. That wasnt me but please do review anything that you can get your hands on neverthless ;-). If you require any clarifications before doing any reviews do feel free to ask. Even on instances where I wouldnt be aware of it I would dig out information on a best effort basis regards Rahul From sundaram at redhat.com Wed Apr 27 13:25:58 2005 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:55:58 +0530 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114599796.1257.45.camel@wvh.timesys.com> References: <426F463E.7040105@redhat.com> <1114599796.1257.45.camel@wvh.timesys.com> Message-ID: <426F92E6.4000207@redhat.com> Hi >I am surprised about your comment that "Red Hat never produced a >distribution that directly targeted the desktop market." > Additional clarification.[1] When I talk about Red Hat doing something or the other, please do understand that these are my personal opinions and might be completely off the track here. I certainly dont want the burden of being viewed as the official voice for my employer regards Rahul [1] I hate those standard disclaimers but they are required at many places anyway From ehemdal at townisp.com Wed Apr 27 20:18:57 2005 From: ehemdal at townisp.com (Erik Hemdal) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:18:57 -0400 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <426F463E.7040105@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> > Stopping retail distribution of Red Hat Linux and moving > towards a more frequently updated Fedora project isnt > equivalent to abandonment of the desktop users. Red Hat has > never produced a distribution that directly targetted the > desktop segment. Beg to differ on this one Rahul. My RH 8.0 boxed set is full of pretty pictures of the "New, Improved" Bluecurve desktop, with improvements on the desktop layout and usability. And anaconda has always (at least since v5.2) supported a "Personal Desktop" installation. While I am strongly pro-Red Hat, I'm another who felt a little bit abandoned when RH9.0 went end-of-life. The Fedora community does well for support, but it is not a substitute for having someone who will receive your email and promises to deliver an answer. > While its true that Red Hat wouldnt isnt > directly involved in retail distribution of Fedora, > independant vendors continue to do that extensively. Fedora > release cycle combined with the Fedora legacy project would > provide something thats pretty close yet > better to previous releases of Red Hat Linux. This depends on your point of view. A release every six months to a year is preferable to me than a new release every three months or so, especially when there's a very significant change. > > Red Hat continues to work on things that are meant to improve > the user experience for Fedora. For example extensive work on > GTK, dbus, hal and things like Network manager are some of > the pieces of desktop infrastructure that springs up to mind. Where can someone discover basic data about new features? I'd want for something less than a tutorial and more than a release note. I had little idea about what hal, dbus, etc. were before installing and experimenting. > Efforts to improve bootup speed using bootchart [2] and > things like GDM early login [3] If this is intended to allow login prior to a full bootup, I hope that users can disable it. If the intent is to make the computer more like Windows, it's no help. This is one user's opinion: allowing a user access to the desktop and applications does no good if the infrastructure isn't working yet. This is one of my significant complaints about Windows. I am allowed to start applications, such as my email reader, before it is able to operate (because network connections are not up yet). When I try to do something, like download email, the client encounters an error and I have to wait longer for the failed action to timeout. In other cases, actions like opening files take longer (because the system is busy in the background) and the result is a system that at best appears bloated and sluggish. > are primarly for desktop > users. servers arent going to rebooted that often for boot up > speed to be a significant factor . right? > > Work on GCJ ( GNU compiler for Java) would enable the > significant amount of Java code in Openoffice 2.0 to e run > under a natively compiled free Java stack which I believe you > would agree is a important thing for the desktop market. > Bravo! Again one user's opinion. More and more of what I do requires Java. I would be happy to see a completely free Java stack. > . . . > The following things are what I would consider important > features that are planned to included in Fedora Core 4 that > you have not mentioned in your review > > Xen [5] - A para virtualisation software that would enable > users to run multiple operating systems or versions of it. Hurrah! > Red Hat GFS [6] - Cluster filesystem Nice. > SELinux update - Significant number of additional deamons > will protected by SELinux in Fedora Core 4 Lukewarm. Some of my students have had significant problems with SELinux, and the advice they have received is generally along the lines of "Oh yeah, it doesn't work right on Fedora, so just turn it off." > Free Java stack > which includes Eclipse and Apache Jakarta Very cool. > Fedora Extras yum > repository enabled by default OK. > GDM early login ???? I'll wait and see. > and removal of > rhgb would be a significant change in user experience for > desktop users Evince document viewer [7] > Yum will use sqllite > database and perform much faster that previous releases Good, good, good. > > regards > Rahul > Just my 40% of a nickel, with a word of thanks for a wonderful distribution. Erik Hemdal From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Apr 27 20:41:59 2005 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:41:59 -0700 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> Message-ID: <1114634519.6151.106.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 16:18 -0400, Erik Hemdal wrote: > Beg to differ on this one Rahul. My RH 8.0 boxed set is full of > pretty > pictures of the "New, Improved" Bluecurve desktop, with improvements > on the > desktop layout and usability. Sure, there is some stuff for desktop, however the release itself was not completely geared for desktop. There was plenty in the release that has no business on a desktop system. > And anaconda has always (at least since v5.2) supported a "Personal > Desktop" > installation. There is also server and custom and etc... These are all things that the release has support for, but it is geared for none of these completely. > While I am strongly pro-Red Hat, I'm another who felt a little bit > abandoned > when RH9.0 went end-of-life. The Fedora community does well for > support, > but it is not a substitute for having someone who will receive your > email > and promises to deliver an answer. This I always questioned. At what time could you get Red Hat Technical Support for a Red Hat Linux product? (not Red Hat Professional or Red Hat Enterprise, Red Hat Linux). > > > While its true that Red Hat wouldnt isnt > > directly involved in retail distribution of Fedora, > > independant vendors continue to do that extensively. Fedora > > release cycle combined with the Fedora legacy project would > > provide something thats pretty close yet > > better to previous releases of Red Hat Linux. > > This depends on your point of view. A release every six months to a > year is > preferable to me than a new release every three months or so, > especially > when there's a very significant change. And if you look at the release history of Fedora Core, it has been about every 6 months. The range is 4 to 8 months, and we just happen to land on 6~ for the first four releases.... -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating From ehemdal at townisp.com Wed Apr 27 21:00:00 2005 From: ehemdal at townisp.com (Erik Hemdal) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:00:00 -0400 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114634519.6151.106.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <1114634519.6151.106.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> Message-ID: <426FFD50.8030906@townisp.com> Jesse Keating wrote: >Sure, there is some stuff for desktop, however the release itself was >not completely geared for desktop. There was plenty in the release that >has no business on a desktop system. > > > I have to agree with you on that one, Jesse. It wasn't a perfectly-tailored desktop. But one of the neat things about Red Hat Linux was that they gave you so much more than what would be needed for a desktop. That's why I was so enamored of RHL. >>While I am strongly pro-Red Hat, I'm another who felt a little bit >>abandoned >>when RH9.0 went end-of-life. The Fedora community does well for >>support, >>but it is not a substitute for having someone who will receive your >>email >>and promises to deliver an answer. >> >> > >This I always questioned. At what time could you get Red Hat Technical >Support for a Red Hat Linux product? (not Red Hat Professional or Red >Hat Enterprise, Red Hat Linux). > > > Well, I know that support was available for Red Hat 8.0 because I bought the boxed set and received the 30 days of email support. I actually had occasion to use it and found that I got what I needed. Support was also provided as far back as v 5.2 (the first release I tried) although I never had to use it then. I recall some higher levels of support you could pay for. After the thirty days, you had to pay $60 a year (or more depending on support level) for continued support and updates. Signing on was easy online, but signing off was a challenge (to do so, one had to send a registered letter 60 days prior to expiration to Red Hat's address in North Carolina.). If you are curious, I can try to dig out the specific data from my old package. >>> >>> >> > >And if you look at the release history of Fedora Core, it has been about >every 6 months. The range is 4 to 8 months, and we just happen to land >on 6~ for the first four releases.... > > > I think I stand corrected on that one, Jesse. I was working on the 3-4 month target that I remembered reading from the Web site, but I might not be remembering correctly. Apologies for getting it wrong. Erik From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Apr 27 21:08:36 2005 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:08:36 -0700 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <426FFD50.8030906@townisp.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <1114634519.6151.106.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> <426FFD50.8030906@townisp.com> Message-ID: <1114636116.6151.122.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 17:00 -0400, Erik Hemdal wrote: > Well, I know that support was available for Red Hat 8.0 because I > bought > the boxed set and received the 30 days of email support. I actually > had > occasion to use it and found that I got what I needed. Support was > also > provided as far back as v 5.2 (the first release I tried) although I > never had to use it then. I recall some higher levels of support you > could pay for. Ok, there was installation support for 30 days, but nothing official beyond installation support. Also, the $60 a year was for up2date services, not for any levels of email/phone support on a product. If I recall correctly (and somebody from Red Hat can correct me) Red Hat Linux never had anything beyond the 30days of installation support. > After the thirty days, you had to pay $60 a year (or more depending > on > support level) for continued support and updates. Signing on was > easy > online, but signing off was a challenge (to do so, one had to send a > registered letter 60 days prior to expiration to Red Hat's address in > North Carolina.). > > If you are curious, I can try to dig out the specific data from my > old > package. I would be curious as to if you had something more than updates. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating From jkeating at j2solutions.net Wed Apr 27 21:22:38 2005 From: jkeating at j2solutions.net (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:22:38 -0700 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114636116.6151.122.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <1114634519.6151.106.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> <426FFD50.8030906@townisp.com> <1114636116.6151.122.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> Message-ID: <1114636958.6151.125.camel@jkeating2.hq.pogolinux.com> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 14:08 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > Ok, there was installation support for 30 days, but nothing official > beyond installation support. Also, the $60 a year was for up2date > services, not for any levels of email/phone support on a product. If > I > recall correctly (and somebody from Red Hat can correct me) Red Hat > Linux never had anything beyond the 30days of installation support. Ok, I was just informed by some Red Hat folks that there was in fact additional support available for purchase on Red Hat Linux product lines, however they aren't clear on what was available as it changed pretty frequently. I stand corrected on that point. -- Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net) Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org) GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub) Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=jkeating From kwade at redhat.com Wed Apr 27 21:45:12 2005 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:45:12 -0700 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> Message-ID: <1114638313.6234.291.camel@erato.phig.org> On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 16:18 -0400, Erik Hemdal wrote: > > > SELinux update - Significant number of additional deamons > > will protected by SELinux in Fedora Core 4 > > Lukewarm. Some of my students have had significant problems with SELinux, > and the advice they have received is generally along the lines of "Oh yeah, > it doesn't work right on Fedora, so just turn it off." Ouch! Since you have students involved, I'll risk the off-topic reply. :) As with any new security paradigm, existing applications are likely to have a few stumbling spots. The targeted policy for Fedora Core 4 works _extremely_ well. The updates for FC4 resolve many of the problems people had in FC3. The policy patching community has increased a lot since inclusion in Fedora Core. Usually a person is having a single problem with SELinux, such as a legacy CGI application getting AVC errors. The solution, aside from writing a few pieces of policy to fix it[1], is to disable SELinux for the daemon, i.e., Apache.[2] Unfortunately, too many people are told to entirely disable SELinux. This reminds me of people being told to turn off ipchains or iptables if they couldn't get a working firewall rule for their application. I don't think SELinux is going away anytime soon, so we might as well get familiar with it. cheers - Karsten [1] To quote myself on writing small policy pieces: http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/selg-section-0120.html [2] Changing a Boolean setting to disable protection for a daemon: http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/rhlcommon-section-0068.html#RHLCOMMON-SECTION-0077 -- Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41 Red Hat SELinux Guide http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From lxmaier at gmail.com Wed Apr 27 22:01:16 2005 From: lxmaier at gmail.com (Alex Maier) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:01:16 +0200 Subject: FUDCon 2 Promo Suggestion Message-ID: <7f617d2705042715013cf0ae94@mail.gmail.com> Hello everyone! I would like to suggest to those of you willing to promote FUDCon 2 to add this (or similar) text to your signature: FUDCon II @ LinuxTag June 24-25, 2005 in Karlsruhe, Germany http://fedoraproject.com/fudcon/ Thanks a lot, Alex From ehemdal at townisp.com Thu Apr 28 01:50:04 2005 From: ehemdal at townisp.com (Erik Hemdal) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:50:04 -0400 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114638313.6234.291.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <1114638313.6234.291.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <4270414C.9070108@townisp.com> Karsten Wade wrote: >Ouch! > >Since you have students involved, I'll risk the off-topic reply. :) > > >The solution, aside from writing a few pieces of policy to fix it[1], is >to disable SELinux for the daemon, i.e., Apache.[2] > >Unfortunately, too many people are told to entirely disable SELinux. > > > Thank you for the post, and apologies if this is getting off-topic. But I appreciate the thoughtful reply and the pointers in your post. I had one student this past term with just the issue you mentioned (Apache and SELinux not getting along) and he was finding it hard to get help in the "usual places". The answers came down to "disable SELinux for the daemon", which wasn't an answer for him: his goal was to get SELinux working with Apache! If it's improved in FC4, again kudos and thank you for taking my post seriously. Erik >[1] To quote myself on writing small policy pieces: >http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/selg-section-0120.html > >[2] Changing a Boolean setting to disable protection for a daemon: > >http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/rhlcommon-section-0068.html#RHLCOMMON-SECTION-0077 > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >Fedora-marketing-list mailing list >Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com >http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > From kgiris2005 at gmail.com Thu Apr 28 04:15:53 2005 From: kgiris2005 at gmail.com (Kenneth Geddings Jr.) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:15:53 -0400 Subject: Posters: etc Message-ID: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> Would it be "legal" to create posters or handouts etc using the fedora core logo if you are just using it to raise more awareness of fedora core (as long as you dont sell it) just a thought. thanks Kenneth Geddings Jr. From sundaram at redhat.com Thu Apr 28 05:05:26 2005 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:35:26 +0530 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> Message-ID: <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> Hi >While I am strongly pro-Red Hat, I'm another who felt a little bit abandoned >when RH9.0 went end-of-life. The Fedora community does well for support, >but it is not a substitute for having someone who will receive your email >and promises to deliver an answer. > Its not possible to get an SLA for Fedora from Red Hat. People who want to sign up for SLA's usually also want a very long support lifecycle. Trying to satisfy the customers who wanted longer release and support lifecycles and people want a spanky new Linux desktop was a tough balance. Red Hat decided to fork it up. It looked like a pretty rational decision to me though not everyone would agree with it. So calling the transition from Red Hat Linux to Fedora Project "treacherous" was hard to disgest. >This depends on your point of view. A release every six months to a year is >preferable to me than a new release every three months or so, especially >when there's a very significant change. > > Fedora releases are currently about every 6 months or so. add up Fedora Legacy and you might even get a better lifecycle. >Where can someone discover basic data about new features? I'd want for >something less than a tutorial and more than a release note. I had little >idea about what hal, dbus, etc. were before installing and experimenting. > Red Hat Magazine (http://redhat.com/magazine) has some of the details. I had the same idea about having a more end user friendly version of the release notes ( think: GNOME release notes) which I suggested on the fedora-docs list . I suspect I might have to do it myself. Of course any help on this would be most welcome > > > >>Efforts to improve bootup speed using bootchart [2] and >>things like GDM early login [3] >> >> > >If this is intended to allow login prior to a full bootup, I hope that users >can disable it. If the intent is to make the computer more like Windows, >it's no help. This is one user's opinion: allowing a user access to the >desktop and applications does no good if the infrastructure isn't working >yet. > >This is one of my significant complaints about Windows. I am allowed to >start applications, such as my email reader, before it is able to operate >(because network connections are not up yet). When I try to do something, >like download email, the client encounters an error and I have to wait >longer for the failed action to timeout. In other cases, actions like >opening files take longer (because the system is busy in the background) and >the result is a system that at best appears bloated and sluggish. > > > Read this and subsequent discussions : https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2005-April/msg00416.html I believe it would answer all your questions and yes it can be switched off and the process does require significant changes to the start up scripts and the right balance to not reproduce any of the Windows boot up issues you have pointed out. Currently the development tree has a rough cut. I trust the developers will get it done right before Fedora Core 4 is released regards Rahul From behdad at cs.toronto.edu Thu Apr 28 05:21:19 2005 From: behdad at cs.toronto.edu (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:21:19 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Its not possible to get an SLA for Fedora from Red Hat. People > who want to sign up for SLA's usually also want a very long > support lifecycle. Trying to satisfy the customers who wanted > longer release and support lifecycles and people want a spanky > new Linux desktop was a tough balance. Red Hat decided to fork > it up. It looked like a pretty rational decision to me though > not everyone would agree with it. So calling the transition > from Red Hat Linux to Fedora Project "treacherous" was hard to > disgest. The problem is not why Red Hat did what it did. IMO the main problem is that Red Hat totally hid the Fedora Project from its users in the discontinutaion email that sent them. It said that's all, no free lunch anymore. I was in the Real World Linux Expo last week. Again, there was the Red Hat booth, with no sign or name of the Fedora Project. Somebody giving a talk mentioned it, just that. To me, it seems like Red Hat is trying to hide Fedora, in the fear that they lose their customers, while we all know that it can't be true. People do not buy Red Hat simply because Red Hat does not provide a free version. There are a zillion free distros out there. For more than 99 percent of personal (nonbusiness) users out there, Fedora is at least as good as Red Hat Linux was. This 99 percent never received any support from Red Hat. Never ever. But Red Hat makes it sound like Fedora is something community driven so low quality. --behdad http://behdad.org/ From sundaram at redhat.com Thu Apr 28 06:35:19 2005 From: sundaram at redhat.com (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:05:19 +0530 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> Message-ID: <42708427.9020405@redhat.com> Hi >The problem is not why Red Hat did what it did. IMO the main >problem is that Red Hat totally hid the Fedora Project from its >users in the discontinutaion email that sent them. > https://www.redhat.com/archives/redhat-watch-list/2004-April/msg00000.html which leads to http://www.redhat.com/solutions/business/migration/ > It said >that's all, no free lunch anymore. I was in the Real World Linux >Expo last week. Again, there was the Red Hat booth, with no sign >or name of the Fedora Project. Somebody giving a talk mentioned >it, just that. To me, it seems like Red Hat is trying to hide >Fedora, in the fear that they lose their customers, while we all >know that it can't be true. > Fedora Project in linked from the homepage of http://redhat.com. We have an exclusive Fedora users and developers conference aka FUDcon. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDConVideos (FUDcon 1) http://www.redhat.com/magazine/006apr05/departments/fedora_status/ (FUDcon 2) Red Hat magazine covers articles on Fedora and its status every month. Fedora Project related news is posted regularly in many major websites. Fedora is after all the official Red Hat. How can we ever hide that ;-) > People do not buy Red Hat simply >because Red Hat does not provide a free version. There are a >zillion free distros out there. For more than 99 percent of >personal (nonbusiness) users out there, Fedora is at least as >good as Red Hat Linux was. This 99 percent never received any >support from Red Hat. Never ever. But Red Hat makes it sound >like Fedora is something community driven so low quality. > > All of the Fedora Core development is done by Red Hat employees which contains a good number of software developed by the community. Encouring the community to participate in the process through efforts like Fedora Extras and Fedora Legacy only helps to enhance it obviously regards Rahul From nman64 at n-man.com Thu Apr 28 06:36:43 2005 From: nman64 at n-man.com (Patrick Barnes) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:36:43 -0500 Subject: Posters: etc In-Reply-To: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> References: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4270847B.9040801@n-man.com> Kenneth Geddings Jr. wrote: > Would it be "legal" to create posters or handouts etc using the fedora > core logo if you are just using it to raise more awareness of fedora > core (as long as you dont sell it) just a thought. > > thanks > > Kenneth Geddings Jr. > > -- > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list > Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > I'm not official, but I think that sort of usage is okay. I'd recommend, however, that you make a note on anything you publish that clearly states that you are not affiliated with Red Hat and do not represent Red Hat or the Fedora Project. See http://fedora.redhat.com/about/trademarks/ -Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64 at n-man.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ehemdal at townisp.com Thu Apr 28 13:49:31 2005 From: ehemdal at townisp.com (Erik Hemdal) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:49:31 -0400 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <42708427.9020405@redhat.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> <42708427.9020405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4270E9EB.9020900@townisp.com> Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >> >> > All of the Fedora Core development is done by Red Hat employees which > contains a good number of software developed by the community. > Encouring the community to participate in the process through efforts > like Fedora Extras and Fedora Legacy only helps to enhance it obviously > > regards > Rahul I come down in agreement with Rahul on this one. I can completely understand Red Hat's reasons for discontinuing Red Hat Linux, and I don't think it was treacherous, just disappointing. I was hoping that Red Hat could make it go, and I'm happy that RHL lived as long as it did. The fact that Red Hat continues to support Fedora indicates a level of integrity that not all firms have anymore. I also believe that Red Hat did a lot to bolster the credibility of Linux in the eyes of many people. I don't think Red Hat ever hid the Fedora Project. I got the EOL email and it pointed me to the Red Hat site with the big RHEL vs. Fedora links. The choices were pretty obvious to me. I had to scramble a bit....because I was a couple of weeks away from starting a new class on RHL 9, but I switched to FC1 and pulled it out. Erik From thulshof at gmail.com Thu Apr 28 14:16:49 2005 From: thulshof at gmail.com (Thijs Hulshof) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 16:16:49 +0200 Subject: Posters: etc In-Reply-To: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> References: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> Message-ID: <9590b2a805042807166fbb0b14@mail.gmail.com> When you've finished the posters, can you show them :-) ? I'd like to see them ! - Thijs On 4/28/05, Kenneth Geddings Jr. wrote: > > Would it be "legal" to create posters or handouts etc using the fedora > core logo if you are just using it to raise more awareness of fedora > core (as long as you dont sell it) just a thought. > > thanks > > Kenneth Geddings Jr. > > -- > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list > Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kgiris2005 at gmail.com Thu Apr 28 16:23:58 2005 From: kgiris2005 at gmail.com (Kenneth Geddings Jr.) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:23:58 -0400 Subject: Posters: etc In-Reply-To: <9590b2a805042807166fbb0b14@mail.gmail.com> References: <42706379.5000706@gmail.com> <9590b2a805042807166fbb0b14@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <42710E1E.6060203@gmail.com> Thijs Hulshof wrote: > When you've finished the posters, can you show them :-) ? > I'd like to see them ! > > - Thijs > > On 4/28/05, *Kenneth Geddings Jr.* > wrote: > > Would it be "legal" to create posters or handouts etc using the fedora > core logo if you are just using it to raise more awareness of fedora > core (as long as you dont sell it) just a thought. > > thanks > > Kenneth Geddings Jr. > > -- > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list > Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com > > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >-- >Fedora-marketing-list mailing list >Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com >http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list > heh well first i need to find nice fedora logos they have a pdf of how to set em up display em but i dont think link to the jpegs or whatever of the actual logos! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kwade at redhat.com Fri Apr 29 19:21:26 2005 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:21:26 -0700 Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <4270E9EB.9020900@townisp.com> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> <42708427.9020405@redhat.com> <4270E9EB.9020900@townisp.com> Message-ID: <1114802486.6234.491.camel@erato.phig.org> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 09:49 -0400, Erik Hemdal wrote: > I don't think Red Hat ever hid the Fedora Project. I got the EOL email > and it pointed me to the Red Hat site with the big RHEL vs. Fedora > links. The choices were pretty obvious to me. IIRC, this was a total SNAFU. Meaning, it was an oversight not to better highlight Fedora in the EOL email, people were -very- vocal about that from the outside, and that vocalization carried internally. Subsequent emails did a better job of highlighting Fedora. When you have a choice between "It's a Conspiracy!" and "it's just stupid humans doing stupid human stuff," most likely it's the latter. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41 Red Hat SELinux Guide http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From behdad at cs.toronto.edu Sat Apr 30 21:12:05 2005 From: behdad at cs.toronto.edu (Behdad Esfahbod) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 17:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Feedback on Fedora Core 4 test 2 review In-Reply-To: <1114802486.6234.491.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <20050427201900.E439929939@ns3.townisp.com> <42706F16.3040704@redhat.com> <42708427.9020405@redhat.com> <4270E9EB.9020900@townisp.com> <1114802486.6234.491.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: > On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 09:49 -0400, Erik Hemdal wrote: > > > I don't think Red Hat ever hid the Fedora Project. I got the EOL email > > and it pointed me to the Red Hat site with the big RHEL vs. Fedora > > links. The choices were pretty obvious to me. I couldn't find the mail, but my vague memory says that this (hiding) happend when Red Hat Linux was abandoned, in Summer 2003, not the EOL in April 2004. I may be wrong though. In EOL, yes, they were pointing to Fedora. --behdad