Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 18 "Spherical Cow" Beta Finally Released

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by mark45 View Post
    Thanks, since in reality neither Apple nor M$ want to be compatible with desktop Linux (recall the recent news with UEFI/keys/whatever being dependent on silverlight is yet another reminder of M$'s dirty games), the most reasonable way to me is to keep updating grub2 with new code capable of listing new versions of window$ and mac and those unix-like systems that use grub2 - if you're not either of these 3 you're not worth the effort since those other OSes would be like 0.01% of the desktop market - this imo would be straightforward and would save quite a lot of code and maintenance woes.
    Though this thought doesn't apply to the new uefi/secure boot standard.
    In practice that doesn't narrow down the problem space much.

    For gedanken purposes, the problem space is this, on a BIOS PC.

    * There can be almost any amount of disks attached to the system.
    * The user can choose to 'boot from' - that is, initiate the boot sequence using whatever is in the MBR of - any one of those disks on any given boot.
    * What is on any of those disks and what is in the MBR of any of those disks can change without any warning to you if you are a single OS on the system.
    * Any of the MBR-based bootloaders can, and may, chainload another bootloader located in the header of any partition on any disk in the system.
    * Any bootloader on the system (MBR or partition) can attempt to directly boot any other OS installed on the system (including any kernel pair that has ever existed, potentially, for any Linux install present).
    * There is absolutely no de jure or de facto standard or even best practice for configuring multiboot. Different sysadmins and OSes can and will have things set up via shared bootloaders, or chainloading, or any other way in any given system.

    So...yeah. That's your problem space. Migraine commencing in...3...2...1...

    The UEFI design is at least theoretically miles, miles better than this. The design is that a list of 'things that can be booted' is maintained by the system firmware, and *only* by the system firmware. If you are an OS, at install time, you register yourself in the firmware's boot menu, with an entry which tells the firmware what your OS is called and what second-stage bootloader it should call when the user chooses to boot you. You install your second-stage bootloader (in a fairly standardized way) and configure it to handle _only_ booting yourself. You do not attempt to deal in any way at all with booting any other operating system, you leave that up to the firmware and the OS in question. It's a far better design. I dream of a future where everyone's finally adopted it and I can forget all the hideous knowledge I've built up about BIOS-based booting...

    Comment


    • #17
      Yes, from this perspective UEFI sounds attractive.
      But imo the problem is that the firmware is closed source (with restrictions like it's forbidden to reverse engineer it or so) and usually of bad quality (has bugs and tested like "if it boots windows it's fine").
      Not to mention that hardware/firmware vendors might do something against desktop Linux on behalf of Microsoft under the aegis of some euphemism (like security or whatever), and if those firmware stop working in a standard way with Linux - you're helpless. In the current environment you at least program grub2 yourself and no one controls you.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by mark45 View Post
        Yes, from this perspective UEFI sounds attractive.
        But imo the problem is that the firmware is closed source (with restrictions like it's forbidden to reverse engineer it or so) and usually of bad quality (has bugs and tested like "if it boots windows it's fine").
        All commercial BIOS implementations are also closed source, nothing is different there. UEFI is a standard, not a codebase: you can write a closed source or open source implementation as you wish. (There are, I believe, already two open source implementation of UEFI available for virtualization use - one for qemu/kvm, one for VirtualBox). BIOS is also a standard, though it's a de facto rather than de jure standard. Anyone can write an implementation of either, and release it under any license they choose. If anything, UEFI is better than BIOS here, because at least UEFI is an *actual defined standard* and we can write Linux to comply with it, and if a UEFI implementation is out of spec, we can complain about that. Since there's no formal BIOS standard, a manufacturer could theoretically build a machine with a gimped-up 'BIOS' that can only boot Windows or anything else you like, and there is no actual written document you could accuse them of violating. (edit: if you mean the movement of some bootloader logic from the potentially-open source OS layer to the probably-proprietary system firmware layer constitutes a loss of freedom, now I think about it, you're right, but frankly, I'd trade that off against the hideousness of the BIOS design any day...a system with an open source UEFI firmware would be the best thing though, of course).

        Originally posted by mark45 View Post
        Not to mention that hardware/firmware vendors might do something against desktop Linux on behalf of Microsoft under the aegis of some euphemism (like security or whatever), and if those firmware stop working in a standard way with Linux - you're helpless. In the current environment you at least program grub2 yourself and no one controls you.
        Again, this is not at all unique to UEFI. They could do that anyway. If someone wants to gimp up a firmware such that it doesn't work with Linux, they don't need to do that via the bootloader mechanism. You could do that with a BIOS implementation if you really wanted to.

        Comment


        • #19
          how about those:

          70% SysV to Systemd Porting from sysVinit init scripts to systemd unit files.
          80% New Installer UI Enhancing the anaconda installer with a new user interface, improving both the end-user experience as well as ease of implementation of new features, particularly new storage technologies, for developers.
          95% rngd default-on rngd (part of the rng-tools package) should be enabled by default.
          99% Secure Boot "Secure Boot" describes a UEFI feature by which malware is prevented from inserting itself into the boot process before the operating system loads. The UEFI feature is required to be enabled on all machines bearing the Windows 8 Client logo, which will be the overwhelming majority of all desktop and notebook systems.

          Comment


          • #20
            It makes sense, but in reality it's not just about fixing the OS loading issue, it opened up a big opportunity for Microsoft to screw us (probably like never before), just read this blog. As I said, the catch is that some euphemism would be a /must/, in this case it's "security" which is used as a tool to wage and cover Microsoft's warfare strategy.
            Last edited by mark45; 11-27-2012, 11:08 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by mark45 View Post
              It makes sense, but in reality it's not just about fixing the OS loading issue, it opened up a big opportunity for Microsoft to screw us (probably like never before), just read this blog. As I said, the catch is that some euphemism would be a /must/, in this case it's "security" which is used as a tool to wage and cover Microsoft's warfare strategy.
              My take on that is in this thread.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by AdamW View Post
                My take on that is in this thread.
                Technically it's a sound take on UEFI.
                But there's quite a childish argument about M$, we all know how Microsoft has been (and is) trying to screw Linux (and not just Linux, and it's not just about Microsoft), no need to repeat, not even their World Tour attempt to claim ownership of Linux with "undisclosed patents" - but it's unfair to Microsoft cause they've done so much more to screw Linux that one needs an entire wiki to count their "merits".

                And you're talking on that forum as if that didn't happen or if somehow God intervened and Microsoft suddenly only cares about its product quality. You also seem to believe that Microsoft caring about a better BIOS and creating problems for competition somehow exclude each other. You're also mentioning "the conspiracy theories are a load of bullcrap" - a lot of stuff in the world is done in conspiracy - it's one of the most natural and real things actually happening: from price-fixing done in conspiracy among corporations, down to mafia, CIA, coups, drug-cartels etc etc - they all act in conspiracy, so do a lot of corporations when bribing (judges, senators, especially in the USA since it's legalized) or working with/for the government and all the shitocracy around it.

                Comment


                • #23
                  By definition conspiracy is something done in secrecy. $ has not openly done things against GNU/Linux or other operating systems. Thus, $ have a conspiracy against GNU/Linux.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    coool

                    the beta monster released anyone have a benchmarks on this monster?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I wish someone would have told me there's no need to download the install dvd.


                      If you have decided to go with gnome the live cd is just fine, the only thing the dvd offers is the ability to pick gnome/kde/lxde etc and a bunch of extra medical and scientific apps that you could download anyway.


                      The live cd is also better to install because you can't in anyway shape or form configure your touchpad or connect to a hidden wi fi network from the dvd installer.


                      If you have a touchpad with no buttons and need to turn on tap to click and 2 finger scrolling or have a hidden wi fi network the anaconda installer is a bitch.

                      Also use gparted to wipe your hard drive as I couldn't figure out how to delete hfs and ntfs partitions from a drive using the fedora installer.


                      edit: anyway is it true what I heard about f18 coming out before christmas?
                      Last edited by Pallidus; 11-29-2012, 07:34 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Pallidus View Post
                        I wish someone would have told me there's no need to download the install dvd.


                        If you have decided to go with gnome the live cd is just fine, the only thing the dvd offers is the ability to pick gnome/kde/lxde etc and a bunch of extra medical and scientific apps that you could download anyway.


                        The live cd is also better to install because you can't in anyway shape or form configure your touchpad or connect to a hidden wi fi network from the dvd installer.


                        If you have a touchpad with no buttons and need to turn on tap to click and 2 finger scrolling or have a hidden wi fi network the anaconda installer is a bitch.

                        Also use gparted to wipe your hard drive as I couldn't figure out how to delete hfs and ntfs partitions from a drive using the fedora installer.


                        edit: anyway is it true what I heard about f18 coming out before christmas?

                        I think yes. but question is which year, 2013? I hope so

                        Also I find recent names doing bad magic
                        Spherical Cow - a Fedora release that nobody has seen and exists only in devs head



                        I hope Shroedingers Cat doesn't mean there's 50% chance it'll be perfect, 50% for complete disaster
                        But you wo't know untill you try

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Pallidus View Post
                          I wish someone would have told me there's no need to download the install dvd.


                          If you have decided to go with gnome the live cd is just fine, the only thing the dvd offers is the ability to pick gnome/kde/lxde etc and a bunch of extra medical and scientific apps that you could download anyway.
                          The download page kinda tilts you towards the live image...and what else did you expect a DVD was going to offer besides more packages?

                          Originally posted by Pallidus View Post
                          The live cd is also better to install because you can't in anyway shape or form configure your touchpad or connect to a hidden wi fi network from the dvd installer.

                          If you have a touchpad with no buttons and need to turn on tap to click and 2 finger scrolling or have a hidden wi fi network the anaconda installer is a bitch.
                          Hidden wireless is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859610 . As for your touchpad, I think the bug there is really in X, not anaconda - touchpads with no buttons are supposed to have tap-to-click enabled *by default*. Can you file a bug (either downstream or upstream, doesn't matter too much) against xorg-x11-drv-evdev, explain you have a no-button touchpad but it doesn't get tap-to-click by default, and include your /var/log/Xorg.0.log and lsusb -v output? Thanks!

                          Originally posted by Pallidus View Post
                          Also use gparted to wipe your hard drive as I couldn't figure out how to delete hfs and ntfs partitions from a drive using the fedora installer.
                          That's a bit vague, but I'll try - if the installer knows you don't have enough free space to install it will force you through a 'reclaim space' dialog, where you can delete partitions by clicking on them, clicking on the word 'Preserve', which magically turns it into a drop-down, which you can then set to 'Delete'. We know this UI sucks, it's not meant to work that way, it just turned out to be weirdly technically difficult to actually implement the intended design for that dialog. It should be better for Final.

                          If you have enough space to install, you can't hit the 'reclaim space' dialog (I'm not sure if this is considered a bug or not), but you can wipe existing partitions by going through custom partitioning - check the box about 'customize'. Existing partitions are shown on the left of the custom partitioning dialog, grouped by the OS install they're a part of. You can click on one and click the '-' button at the bottom of that pane to delete it (in all cases, partitioning decisions aren't actually *applied* until you start the install, btw, so you can always bail out until then).

                          Originally posted by Pallidus View Post
                          edit: anyway is it true what I heard about f18 coming out before christmas?
                          No, it will not come out by Xmas. Early next year is the schedule.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            In case anyone was straining their brains trying to work out why their beta installation wasn't working, Mate and Cinnamon will not install properly from the x86_64 DVD, a home folder is created with virtually nothing in, you are able to sign in but nothing else happens, access is only possible from a terminal. The answer is to select a Gnome install and download your preference Cinnamon or Mate once installed - I have just wasted many hours thinking that my dvd or method of installation were flawed. Very impressed with Cinnamon on Fedora though!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Wurzeld View Post
                              In case anyone was straining their brains trying to work out why their beta installation wasn't working, Mate and Cinnamon will not install properly from the x86_64 DVD, a home folder is created with virtually nothing in, you are able to sign in but nothing else happens, access is only possible from a terminal. The answer is to select a Gnome install and download your preference Cinnamon or Mate once installed - I have just wasted many hours thinking that my dvd or method of installation were flawed. Very impressed with Cinnamon on Fedora though!
                              This (at least the MATE case, I wasn't aware Cinnamon is broken too, I'll update the page) is documented on the Common Bugs page:

                              https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Commo...ate-dvd-broken

                              Sorry for the inconvenience.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                you are better off avoiding the dvd altogether.


                                The only DE's that you can't run live sessions from, cinnamon and mate, don't really work so it's just a matter of picking gnome/kde/lxde/etc and install it from a live session


                                I actually prefer the yumex graphical thing in the lxde version than the 'software' thing in gnome.


                                just adding rpmfusion and then installing vlc, the process was simple and straightforward in yumex ... in 'software' you search for vlc and there's vlc media and core and phyton this and that and I installed a bunch of them but no vlc icon or anything.

                                fedora desperately needs a software center :/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X