Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 20 Will Be Released Next Week

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

  • Fedora 20 Will Be Released Next Week

    Phoronix: Fedora 20 Will Be Released Next Week

    After being pressed by repeated delays Fedora 20 "Heisenbug" has been given the go-ahead to be officially released next week...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTU0MjM

  • #2
    While the Dev and QA teams agreed to go with the release, the Release Engineering team was not present when the decision was made. All three need to give the green light before a release is made.
    Anyways, I believe Release Engineering will go with it and there will be no more delays.

    To those of you, who are impatient to try the final Fedora 20, here is the link to RC1.1, which if I understand correctly, will be used as the final image. http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/20-RC1.1/

    Comment


    • #3
      Downloaded Fedora 20 RC1 today and was surprised: positively, because the desktop was very polished, good looking and stable. Not what I expect from a bleeding edge distro. Negatively, because it didn't really seem that bleeding edge to me. Mesa 9.2, Linux 3.11, Firefox 25... inb4 500MB day0 updates.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by d2kx View Post
        Downloaded Fedora 20 RC1 today and was surprised: positively, because the desktop was very polished, good looking and stable. Not what I expect from a bleeding edge distro. Negatively, because it didn't really seem that bleeding edge to me. Mesa 9.2, Linux 3.11, Firefox 25... inb4 500MB day0 updates.
        I think it was Adam that said that Mesa 10 and Xorg 1.15 may not come to F20, they may be held off until F21 (we'll see, maybe we'll get a nice surprise)

        But the kernel and firefox should get updates as always.

        Comment


        • #5
          Fedora 20 Will Be Released Next Week
          yeah.. right..

          I don't believe it til I see it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ncopa View Post
            yeah.. right..

            I don't believe it til I see it.
            There has been no history of Fedora announcing that they will do a release next week and retracting that. The final release images are already available. I am not linking to it since it has not been mirrored yet.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
              There has been no history of Fedora announcing that they will do a release next week and retracting that. The final release images are already available. I am not linking to it since it has not been mirrored yet.
              This is very good to hear!

              I have a system that is a potential update target so I was on the Fedora web site yesterday and have to say I'm a bit disappointed with that site. Why? Finding information on the soon to be announced Fedora 29 was a pain in the you know what, I was expecting to be able to find a listing of the default software packages and found nothing. That could be me, but honestly a release a week away should be marketed better than what is seen on the Fedora web site. We are talking www.fedora project.org here. Also some parts of the site such as that associated with the FEL spin are very dated.

              Mind you I'm not complaining about Fedora which I've always liked as a distro. It is just that the web site (www.fedoraproject.org) seems to be a bit flashy and difficult for somebody that doesn't spend a lot of time there.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                I think it was Adam that said that Mesa 10 and Xorg 1.15 may not come to F20, they may be held off until F21 (we'll see, maybe we'll get a nice surprise)

                But the kernel and firefox should get updates as always.
                This would be such a bull! Tearing on Intel GPU-s is fixable only by having the bundle land in Fedora!
                Bug 711028 - Tearing on Intel GPU - the CLUTTER_PAINT workaround

                Could you tell me who is this Adam you speak of (his involvment with Fedora development)?

                BTW, has anyone had a problem with inability to set menus_have_icons using gconf-editor?
                Originally posted by Bucic
                I know they're enabled in gconf-editor by setting:
                desktop/gnome/interface buttons_have_icons and menus_have_icons
                https://ask.fedoraproject.org/questi...#post-id-23117
                https://ask.fedoraproject.org/questi...context-menus/

                But it doesn't work on my current install. Does anyone know how to fix this?

                Fedora 20 (F18 -> fedup to F19 -> fedup to F20).
                It used to work on the F19 install. I've been using Faience icons theme since F19 and it was enabled while doing fedup, if it matters.

                What I tried:
                - disabling the Faience icon theme
                - setting the gconf settings also via sudo gconf-editor

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bucic View Post
                  This would be such a bull! Tearing on Intel GPU-s is fixable only by having the bundle land in Fedora!
                  Bug 711028 - Tearing on Intel GPU - the CLUTTER_PAINT workaround

                  Could you tell me who is this Adam you speak of (his involvment with Fedora development)?

                  BTW, has anyone had a problem with inability to set menus_have_icons using gconf-editor?
                  The post by Adam is: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...068#post379068

                  But keep in mind his wording is "I dont believe" and F20 is already shipping a Xorg 1.15 snapshot isnt it? So it may end up shipping regardless. Or they may selectively pull in the DRI3 and Present changes. Only time will tell right now

                  Hold on, you were IN that thread, Bucic -_-

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
                    Finding information on the soon to be announced Fedora 29 was a pain in the you know what, I was expecting to be able to find a listing of the default software packages and found nothing.
                    Distrowatch is great for getting info on versions of core packages, though I agree it's a nice thing to have on a distribution's website.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                      The post by Adam is: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...068#post379068

                      But keep in mind his wording is "I dont believe" and F20 is already shipping a Xorg 1.15 snapshot isnt it? So it may end up shipping regardless. Or they may selectively pull in the DRI3 and Present changes. Only time will tell right now

                      Hold on, you were IN that thread, Bucic -_-
                      No, Fedora 20 is shipping Xorg 1.14.
                      I was, but I thought you speak of someone else by the name of Adam or that you have some info on the Adam's credibility.

                      Originally posted by cynical View Post
                      Distrowatch is great for getting info on versions of core packages, though I agree it's a nice thing to have on a distribution's website.
                      Fedora packadges
                      https://admin.fedoraproject.org/upda...5457102686f259
                      http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...002#post379002
                      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/ChangeSet

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Bucic View Post
                        or that you have some info on the Adam's credibility.
                        Well as far as HIS credibility... He "works for Red Hat as the Fedora QA Community Monkey." lol

                        https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                          Well as far as HIS credibility... He "works for Red Hat as the Fedora QA Community Monkey." lol

                          https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Adamwill
                          Well, at least RH has a community monkey I'm sure the Mutter guys have no QA monkeys.

                          It would all mean that the only hope to get the tearing fixed is to report a bug against the Gnome-related issue on fedora's bugzilla. The only problem is my experience with such a scenario:
                          Bug 977391 - Gnome Shell tearing on Sandy Bridge
                          First, clueless about what is wrong with the animations, then - fails to connect the dots regarding the well known issue with mutter vs intel causing this, to finally abandon the bug altogether.

                          Somewhat similar flow
                          Bug 979551 - Disk produces regular clicking sound
                          "this is just userspace" grinding your HDD mechanisms, I heard. Go figure.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Bucic View Post
                            Well, at least RH has a community monkey I'm sure the Mutter guys have no QA monkeys.

                            It would all mean that the only hope to get the tearing fixed is to report a bug against the Gnome-related issue on fedora's bugzilla. The only problem is my experience with such a scenario:
                            Bug 977391 - Gnome Shell tearing on Sandy Bridge
                            First, clueless about what is wrong with the animations, then - fails to connect the dots regarding the well known issue with mutter vs intel causing this, to finally abandon the bug altogether.
                            (I have a response to this, but im currently tracking down the source)

                            Originally posted by Bucic;380527
                            Somewhat similar flow
                            [URL="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979551"
                            Bug 979551 - Disk produces regular clicking sound [/URL]
                            "this is just userspace" grinding your HDD mechanisms, I heard. Go figure.
                            Well... Technically is probably buggy hard drive firmware that userspace is assuming is accurate. Time-to-spindown, at least in my experience, is measured in minutes. Like 5mniutes, 10 minutes and then it will spin down to conserve power. But in that bug the firmware is reporting a spin down time of (if we assume that its in seconds, and im not sure it is) 2 minutes and 43seconds.... Which is just odd. Its like when you see marker at a train station and its marked as platform "9 3/4" ( ) its just... wrong.

                            So userspace is taking the firmware literally, the drive is spinning down. The heads are parking, hence the initial click. The heads spinback up when data is needed (which for a game installed on the hard drive, that would be... constantly) thats the second click. Firmware shuts down the drive again, click, powers it back up, click. Etc. TLP is trying to force a new value to the firmware, but the drive isnt accepting it. The safest thing for the user to do would be to turn off power-saving mode on the drive which can normally be done through hdparm, because obviously the firmware of the drive isn't responsible enough to handle it

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                              (I have a response to this, but im currently tracking down the source)



                              Well... Technically is probably buggy hard drive firmware that userspace is assuming is accurate. Time-to-spindown, at least in my experience, is measured in minutes. Like 5mniutes, 10 minutes and then it will spin down to conserve power. But in that bug the firmware is reporting a spin down time of (if we assume that its in seconds, and im not sure it is) 2 minutes and 43seconds.... Which is just odd. Its like when you see marker at a train station and its marked as platform "9 3/4" ( ) its just... wrong.

                              So userspace is taking the firmware literally, the drive is spinning down. The heads are parking, hence the initial click. The heads spinback up when data is needed (which for a game installed on the hard drive, that would be... constantly) thats the second click. Firmware shuts down the drive again, click, powers it back up, click. Etc. TLP is trying to force a new value to the firmware, but the drive isnt accepting it. The safest thing for the user to do would be to turn off power-saving mode on the drive which can normally be done through hdparm, because obviously the firmware of the drive isn't responsible enough to handle it
                              Technically I don't give a damn. Excuse my tone but IMO it's perfectly adequate to such attitude. Not yours, the maintainer's. I've reported the bug on Fedora's bugzilla, so if I have selected the wrong component a moderator (?) should change it, not ignore a bug that can damage hardware.

                              Firmware? Bull. How many manhours does it take to implement a [Load_Cycle_Count delta > 5/min => disable power-saving mode] mechanism?

                              Thanks for the hdparm tip. Your single post has been more helpful than the maintainers comments on the bug.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X