Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DNF5 Isn't Ready For Fedora 39 - Now Delayed To Fedora 41

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

  • #21
    from the fedora wiki, aside from various performance improvements, i noticed this:

    DNF5 has smaller install size - 114 MB (Install size of DNF is 165 MB)
    when did things get THIS complicated?

    ( https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Chang...aceDnfWithDnf5 )

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by fitzie View Post

      CentOS Linux is being eliminated, but CentOS Stream, which is basically the same thing is not. Centos Stream, is basically is basically like a stable linux distro but with updates that don't have pre-qa [...].
      Where did you get the impression there's no pre-QA? Red Hat QE tests every change before it becomes available in CentOS Stream (as binary packages).

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by fitzie View Post

        CentOS Linux is being eliminated, but CentOS Stream, which is basically the same thing is not. Centos Stream, is basically is basically like a stable linux distro but with updates that don't have pre-qa (like updates-testing on fedora).
        Some will deduce that but piss-poor job such tweeting is, for others (great majority?) will go off of it on tirades about RedHat - as many comments there already suggest.

        Comment


        • #24
          I've had exactly zero problems with RPM/DNF in Fedora/Fedora Core over the past two decades but I have some packages required for multimedia support:

          Code:
          dnf list installed | egrep -v "@fedora|@updates"
          egrep: warning: egrep is obsolescent; using grep -E
          Installed Packages
          VirtualBox-7.0.x86_64                      7.0.10_158379_fedora36-1           @System      
          faad2-devel.x86_64                         1:2.10.1-1.fc38                    @@commandline
          faad2-libs.x86_64                          1:2.10.1-1.fc38                    @@commandline
          fdk-aac.x86_64                             2.0.2-5.fc38                       @@commandline
          fdk-aac-devel.x86_64                       2.0.2-5.fc38                       @@commandline
          google-chrome-stable.x86_64                115.0.5790.102-1                   @google-chrome
          Along with mpv, ffmpeg, x264 and x265 compiled manually from sources and installed into /usr/local.

          Everything works fine.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by lejeczek View Post

            Some will deduce that but piss-poor job such tweeting is, for others (great majority?) will go off of it on tirades about RedHat - as many comments there already suggest.
            Red Hat employees just seem unable to communicate. So many problems could so easily be avoided if they knew how to communicate properly, lol

            Comment


            • #26
              Will see how Fedora fares over the next few releases. A return to Debian may be in the cards

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by MrCooper View Post

                Where did you get the impression there's no pre-QA? Red Hat QE tests every change before it becomes available in CentOS Stream (as binary packages).
                can you find one documentation link on centos.org that backs up this statement?

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by fitzie View Post

                  can you find one documentation link on centos.org that backs up this statement?
                  Multiple Red Hat folks involved with CentOS Stream have pointed out that Red Hat QE does sign off on updates to stream. For example,

                  In CentOS Stream however, all updates are pushed as soon as they are signed off by Red Hat Quality Assurance department

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post

                    Multiple Red Hat folks involved with CentOS Stream have pointed out that Red Hat QE does sign off on updates to stream. For example,
                    fair enough. I meant to say it's not the full testing of rhel point releases, which I suspect is true. honestly in looking into centos, I don't even see the point of it existing, it's basically as closed development as rhel is. redhat should call it free rhel free edition. that would end the people saying rhel isn't free.

                    [edit.. or maybe call it rhel unlimited]

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by fitzie View Post

                      fair enough. I meant to say it's not the full testing of rhel point releases, which I suspect is true.
                      ‚Äč
                      RHEL point releases are directly branches off CentOS stream and CentOS stream is upstream for it, so it should closely track the testing efforts.

                      Originally posted by fitzie View Post
                      honestly in looking into centos, I don't even see the point of it existing, it's basically as closed development as rhel is
                      It is far more open with CentOS stream since unlike before all the changes are published as development happen instead of only after the releases are made. This is CentOS stream has participation from other large organizations.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X