Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 34 To Release Next Week As A Very Exciting Update

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by ix900 View Post

    That's wonderful that applications have to fully support something else now. /s
    That's why there is pipewire-pulse, most applications work fine with it and don't need to change anything at all. Pulseeffect is a bit special there as it is "Limiter, compressor, reverberation, equalizer and auto volume effects" So i guess it will benefit from Pipewire compared to pulseaudio.
    And seems like the dev likes new stuff as he does port it to GTK4 already

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by calc View Post

      And yet you still can't upgrade between Fedora releases without extra data, and lots of testing, to determine how to do it. And CentOS/RHEL which is based on Fedora barely can be upgraded at all.

      With Debian its required that packages actually upgrade properly continuously, and that has been the cases since at least apt came into existence in 1998, when I started as a Debian Developer.
      It's also required in Fedora (and has been for at least the last decade), and that happens all the time in Rawhide. But we test because "belt and suspenders" is good no matter what.

      As for CentOS/RHEL, that issue happens because Red Hat has not made in-place upgrades a priority during the development of new major releases. I think this will change now that RHEL is getting new major releases more often (every three years instead of every five years).

      SUSE always has supported in-place upgrades, so you can do in-place upgrades across SLE/Leap releases.

      Comment


      • #23
        nice experiment
        good luck

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Turbine View Post
          Funnily enough Fedora 34 is what made me use Windows fulltime again. The Gnome desktop is still missing too many basic features and suffers from bad multi-monitor support and poor performance when you have multiple Windows opened.

          All Windows need was a mod to add open in bash shell and removing a bunch of unnecessary items in the right click menu.

          I did give KDE a go before switching, but unfortunately it was even worse than Gnome and Windows due to the clutter, even poorer multi-monitor support and bad performance. I have a nvidia 1080 and it feels like I'm running an Intel 4000.

          At least Fedora solved my headset no-sound audio issues I had in Ubuntu. And the system hanging for 30 seconds on shutdown.
          Why not use XFCE?

          Originally posted by loganj View Post
          nice experiment
          good luck
          Been using it since Fedora Core 1 - hasn't really felt anything "experimental" about it. A little bit on the bleeding edge but then you get the latest and greatest as well.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by calc View Post

            And yet you still can't upgrade between Fedora releases without extra data, and lots of testing, to determine how to do it. And CentOS/RHEL which is based on Fedora barely can be upgraded at all.

            With Debian its required that packages actually upgrade properly continuously, and that has been the cases since at least apt came into existence in 1998, when I started as a Debian Developer.
            While issues can indeed arise sometimes as Fedora is a cutting-edge, or razor-edge some say, system, your statement is mostly untrue.
            Myself and many other devs I know, one at work (so it's a real environment, if I may say) are regularly upgrading Fedora through dnf-system-upgrade plugin and it's totally fine.
            My longest running Fedora, my current work laptop, went from 27 or 28 (so long ago I forgot) to 33 without a single breaking issue being related to Fedora... Just one issue, to be fair, because of nouveau disliking my Nvidia chip, too fresh back then.
            Last edited by pazns; 24 April 2021, 09:50 PM.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by calc View Post

              And yet you still can't upgrade between Fedora releases without extra data, and lots of testing, to determine how to do it. And CentOS/RHEL which is based on Fedora barely can be upgraded at all.

              With Debian its required that packages actually upgrade properly continuously, and that has been the cases since at least apt came into existence in 1998, when I started as a Debian Developer.
              Nonsense. Fedora has "dnf distupgrade" if you want to use that.. But you can also just do a "dnf update --relleasever=XX" XX being the version you want to update to. On RedHat you just install the relevant repo file first then do an update. I have done that on thousands of servers and only once had an issue and I think that was on Redhat 3.

              Some one once build a server called the Cube that was a truly headless thing with only a serial port and no graphics at all it had an AMD processor in it. It was said that it only supported Redhat so that was what I installed. Being truly headless you can guess how hard installing on it was. But after I got Redhat installed on it I eventually updated it into a Centos server and later updated that into a fedora machine. I was positive it would fail each time I changed OS but it worked fine. Ain't nothing wrong with RPM.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by 144Hz View Post
                The new desktop UI is nice. No extensions for me.
                I wouldn't say "no extensions" in my case, but definitely fewer extensions with GNOME 40.
                At the very least I need the "Argos" extension for running my own hardware monitoring scripts on the top bar.
                A feature like this is very important to me in any desktop environment.
                But yeah, beyond that, the new design is better all around.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post

                  Why not use XFCE?

                  Been using it since Fedora Core 1 - hasn't really felt anything "experimental" about it. A little bit on the bleeding edge but then you get the latest and greatest as well.
                  Been using Fedora since Core 1 as well. Gnome 2 was great -- took the best from Windows Vista and stuck with it. With Gnome's switch to Gnome 3 on Core 13, I switched to Xfce. And never looked back.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by Turbine View Post
                    Funnily enough Fedora 34 is what made me use Windows fulltime again. The Gnome desktop is still missing too many basic features and suffers from bad multi-monitor support and poor performance when you have multiple Windows opened.

                    All Windows need was a mod to add open in bash shell and removing a bunch of unnecessary items in the right click menu.

                    I did give KDE a go before switching, but unfortunately it was even worse than Gnome and Windows due to the clutter, even poorer multi-monitor support and bad performance. I have a nvidia 1080 and it feels like I'm running an Intel 4000.

                    At least Fedora solved my headset no-sound audio issues I had in Ubuntu. And the system hanging for 30 seconds on shutdown.
                    The nvidia 1080 is the problem; actually Nouveau. It will run extremely well if you install nvidia's binary driver, but with 30 second hangs at shutdown and poor multi monitor issues there is an almost certainty that you were using the open source driver.

                    Nvidia does this to us, you are not alone. They refuse to publish specifications and the end result are these kinds of abnormalities. It would not matter what distro you chose unless you got blank lucky. You have to play by nvidia's rules, you have no choice that is just the world we live in. I really hate to be the bearer of bad news to you.

                    I'm a AMD user, I won't lie, and I choose AMD because the driver just works and I don't need to fuss with having to install some extra driver cruft. I just want automagic go from day one. But the reality is that the nvidia binary driver is a very well architected piece of software as much as I dislike it philosophically.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by calc View Post

                      There is a lot more to packages than just the package format itself, which gets conflated with the package format. For debs there is the very extensive Debian Policy and related documents that apply to any package that is allowed into Debian. Which means that nearly all deb packages, outside of PPAs, comply with it. That's also one of the of the reasons why people recommend against using PPAs.

                      There really isn't much on the rpm side enforcing packaging standards to that extent like there is with debs.

                      https://www.debian.org/doc/
                      This is more of policies rather than technical limitations. If Debian started with .rpm in some parallel universe these policies still persist.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X