Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Fedora Core 5 Available 327

Jan Slupski writes "New release day today. Fedora Core 5 CD images are now available for download (i386, ppc, x86_64) on the ftp servers or via the torrent page." Linclips also has a short screencast on some of the default functionality.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Fedora Core 5 Available

Comments Filter:
  • by clear_thought_05 ( 915350 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @12:46PM (#14957509)
    There are some pages: installation guide [], installation notes [] which should be valuable starting points.
  • Re:bug sorted? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by typical ( 886006 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @01:02PM (#14957675) Journal
    Actually, this *is* a bug. It was not intentional on the part of the Fedora folks.

    Of course, I don't *like* binary drivers very much, but ATI and NVidia have agreed to stick with 'em if you want 3d support on their modern cards. I have a Radeon 9250 (with the 128-bit datapath), which is about as peppy a card as you can get and still have open source drivers.

    If the Open Graphics Project [] ever releases any hardware, unless it's $400 or something like that, I'll buy it -- it'll be fully open source.

    If one vendor would release even a half-decent card and support it fully with open-source drivers, I'd buy it in a moment (binary microcode is okay, but I want everything running host-side to be OSS).

    I know that few people feel this way, and most gamers are happy just using binary drivers and the current NVidia or ATI cards, but there are a group of people who feel the same way I do.

  • by realmolo ( 574068 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @01:12PM (#14957765)
    As a desktop distro, it sucks pretty hard. But for servers, it's great. It seems that *every* piece of server-oriented software is designed with Fedora/Red Hat in mind.

  • by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <> on Monday March 20, 2006 @01:17PM (#14957803) Homepage Journal
    If you prefer something that looks like RH but evolves at a more stately pace, may I suggest CentOS []. This is RHEL built from the the Open Sources.
  • by skogs ( 628589 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @01:42PM (#14958088) Journal
    This is a hobby OS. It is the developement tree for RHEL. What is so hard to figure out here? It is not a beginner distro, it is a testing ground for new ideas and functions. The entire point is to test things, and separated by name so that people like your professor cannot sue RedHat when something doesn't work as it should.

    Point release version numbers don't really apply to something that is perpetually beta. There are dozens of Fedora based distros...ever notice that they all make changes/mods for better security/hardwaredetection/userinterface/etc..

    I know this is a flame, and some fedora fanboys will mod be down for this and flame me, but look around> this is a perpetual beta. If you want the 'good stuff' pay for it, or download something that has another couple of steps of tweaking built in.
  • Re:Fedora Mirrors (Score:2, Insightful)

    by LnxAddct ( 679316 ) <> on Monday March 20, 2006 @01:46PM (#14958127)
    Most major sites that run Fedora to host their website, also mirror it. and are two of the largest sites that I can think of off the top of my head that run Fedora in the back and mirror it, but there are plenty of other huge sites running it as well. It really is a good distro, zealots tend to spread sensless FUD about it though.
  • Re:MP3's? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by quintesse ( 654840 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @02:14PM (#14958360)
    And it is people like us who will make sure that ATI and nVidia will never change their ways, why should they? People still keep buying their stuff even if they have to jump through hoops to install the drivers.

    Now, truth be told, I said "us" because I use the proprietary drivers as well and I am happy they exist but I also agree that ATI and nVidia must be pushed as hard as possible to open up more and Fedora/Redhat/Debian (and probably others) can't do that if they tell people "you shouldn't use those drivers, but this is how you install them".

    You make a decision and you stick by it.

    I have decided I _need_ my daily FPS-fix ;-)
  • Re:what sad.. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by YooHoo2U2 ( 944651 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @02:30PM (#14958492)
    whats sad is windows XP is a single CD...

    I've never understood why some people bitch about getting stuff for free. So, tell me, Mr. Coward: Does that single CD also contain an office suite, multiple SQL servers, a full suite of programming languages (C/C++, perl, ruby, python, java, and more), dozens of games, etc. etc. etc? No? Then you better count the CDs for MS Office, SQL Server, Visual Studio, etc. etc. etc. When you get done, let us know how many you come up with.

    (Actually, I guess I have to agree with you: It *is* sad that XP is a single CD because you don't get very much for your money)
  • by Nermal ( 7573 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @02:45PM (#14958619) Homepage
    While it's true that Fedora is a proving ground for new technologies, it's a mistake to say that it is in "perpetual beta". Rawhide, the development branch of Fedora, is in perpetual beta. Fedora Core is the stable branch of Rawhide. If it's not stable then something is wrong. So while on the one hand Fedora is not intended to be enterprise-grade and I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the GP, on the other it does have its own test process and its own devel/stable release cycle.

    Also, Fedora doesn't have point releases because point releases are old-fashioned. There's no need to wait for bug fixes to accumulate before making them available anymore because tools like Yum can be used to make them available immediately. New features are added every six months or so in a new major version, but it serves the same purpose as what used to be called a point release. The only difference is in the numbers.
  • Re:Fallacy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Crispy Critters ( 226798 ) on Monday March 20, 2006 @03:00PM (#14958742)
    "For a start both Ogg and FLAC are encumbered by patents just like every other compression technology out there."

    Then why does the Ogg Vorbis FAQ [] say, "it is completely free, open, and unpatented"?

    Why does the Flac FAQ [] describe it as an "open patent free codec"?

    Please explain in what sense they are encumbered.

Nondeterminism means never having to say you are wrong.