I think you're just very lazy still and complaining about nothing you can do nothing about. If you want something that Just Works (TM) - why not pay the extra money for Suse or for the RHEL4 WS? You complain so much but why don't you make the software better? You have a clearview in your mind for what you want so why not start programming? You realise these people make no money for what they do and you have the ordacity to run them down? It's disgusting!

If only Fedora worked out of the box I'd use it in my open source lab as the distro of choice because right now I have one box using Fedora Core just to see what it takes to crack it, etc. Like their security that states it might cause stability problems if you use it. SELinux.

Many people love Fedora Core because they have one system and some big broadband pipe to update the o/s and the packages every day Fedora needs those thousand updates. I myself am unable to do this because...

1) There are only 4 ISP's where I live. The phone company, AOL and another one. These are all dialup, as is in 56k analog modem. Which is what my Internet pipe is on my main work/test box. Try updating Fedora Core with a 56k... which is what I did as a goof. I had 868 packages installed and yum wanted to update 539 of them. Class, How many days would this take for this one system using a 56k modem? What about ISP's that allow only certain amount of time online. Can you still update ? No, yum crashes.

2) We have Directv now, which is the 4th ISP and have the ability to have their satellite version of broadband, but because of the cost and reason #3 it's just not cost effective. Also in winter we get one to two feet of snow a day. To watch TV some days, I have to pour hot water on the dish, which has a ladder mounted next to it perm now. I didn't know one milimeter of ice would allow music and not video. (Why can't we get a picture? We get sound on the music channels!!)

3) The LAN I have is not hooked up to the Internet because the companies that own the software I test don't want it to be for obvious reasons, security of unknown new releases. How would I update 20 different systems that had to be reinstalled constantly because of the tests involved? This is why I asked if I could update the kernel on ISO's of the install CD's.

I did however set up my own internal repository that I used yum to update with a few machines to see if that was an option. It worked but Fedora seemed to have one update needed each day so I stopped using yum. And then the openssl thing just made it clear that Fedora Core is a toy for the naive and unsuspecting. Putting a known hackable package which has to do with Internet security for Internet applications is just plain unbelievable.

One look at the "Description" of the Fedora Project should have done it for me, but it was my mistake not to go to the Fedora Project web site at Red Hat dot com because I trust Red Hat havin used it in the past with AlphaServer's.

One little mistake on my part which I won't make again.

I beta test yes, but I get paid by the people who I test for. I will not however beta test FC for RH so they can use the data and packages to use with their mainstay, RH. It's not worth it and I don't like being exploited. I just can't imagine why so many people like the grief that goes along with using FC. The old phrase, "to each his/her own" is definitely applicable for this case scenario. If you like being one and doing it for them, have at it. Just remember who gets the gravy after you are done paying for broadband, testing and fixing the stuff, along with writing up howto's if you do so and then the constant web surfing and downloading of software to make it "workable and/or stable", etc. Good luck to you all!

(There should be a HUMUNGOUS notice on the Fedora Project at RH.com that says "The following things expected from an open source distro are not included and the ones that are, are deliberately disabled for your own protection.")

Fair enough. Do you have any links about the ssl thing? I wasn't aware of it untill you mentioned it.

If, however, being exploited means getting a cutting edge distro for £0.00 which has RPMs available for it (3rd party or otherwise) for any software I've ever needed, then I'm quite happy being exploited.

Cheers.

Dave

Quote link > http://fedora.redhat.com

"with the community".... so you download the broken and unfinished product, finish it and maybe post the fix on some internet site and rh gets wind of it somehow or through the normal feedback channels and then takes the proven item from FC, puts it into RH and makes a bundle with it. Did I miss something?

ilikejam,

link? I posted it here at lq ... the only update they, rh had in the updates directory at download.gedora.redhat.com was 0.9.6 when the openssl that comes with fc3 is 0.9.7

that means they know! i have no idea what version is in that directory now.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=305805
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=306726

Also, it's not free if you pay for internet access to download it and then have a 56k that takes days online, electricity bill.... the update for openssl is enormous when you have a 56k! Try dropping your link speed down to 4.4kbps, then talk to me about RPM update. It's NOT one RPM because OpenSSL is hooked up into lynx, gftp, and the list goes on. I used yum and then when it said how many and how much I decided to go for something secure and stable that I had here and could just install without waiting for days, getting disconnected every 420.8 minutes, because that's the alloted time I can stay online, only to restart yum again after it crashed because it wasn't just the openssl rpm.

t3gah, I think what you may have missed is that this is open-source software. This is how it's supposed to work. Yes RedHat does make money (they're not selling the software, they're selling support), but the developers of the software they supply knew when they released their code under OSS licenses that this is possible. RedHat have written their fair share of code too, so they're not just bundling packages and raking in the cash.

Cheers for the links to the SSL vuln. It does appear to just be a DoS vector, though...

Dave

Afterall they did create RPM :/

Hi t3gah,

Thanks for your long notes - I've been following this thread with interest. I personally like FC3 quite a lot - I have broadband and I enjoy its changeability. But then I'm not running it on a PC that is in the slightest bit sensitive in terms of the data it holds, so even if something went absolutely tits-up I wouldn't be too concerned.

But its great to hear your opinions - that SSL issue will certainly dissuade me from using FC3 on anything in the production environment, and I completely agree that FC3 is not for someone on Dial Up. My father has been trying to do it for months, and its a nightmare! :-)

But in a certain niche, which is my niche, its perfect! :-D

Jamie.

There are some people that should not have computers.
You are the type of people that are going thru pages of penthouse magazine complaning about how this be published, look at this picture, it's terrible.
Now you know why some animals eat there young, snakes don't have fur.
If i had as much to be mad about I would try a different distro? Go someplace else my friend
shutup deal with it. Turn off your computer and step away from it real slow.

t3gah,

Your own website claims your a guru though with Linux.. most guru's I personally know, know how to fix their install and OS issues.. or at least don't complain about it..

I installed Fedora Core 3 on my secondary desktop and it works like a charm. And about the mp3 support, perhaps knowing a little history about Redhat and such would tell you why it doesn't support it out of the box per se..

To add to this, I was at a presentation at FUDCon in Boston in which Red Hat's Vice President, Open Source Affairs, Michael Tiemann, stated the reason for Fedora. As well as the genral community wanting a free version, paying customers who want bleeding edge/broken stuff were complaining that they had to wait for RHEL versions and that they had older stuff in them. Fedora is a way for us to get something to work on and for loyal RH paying corporate customers to get something to test/see the next generation of RH.

There is no sinister plan behind Fedora and it's not there to annoy everyone.

Well I am NOT a Linux guru, in fact I'm little more than a newbie, but in most cases I don't mind fixing Fedora at all. Fedora definitely has it's share of problems, but most of them are fixable. If someone doesn't enjoy fixing and working with their Linux system than I would agree that Fedora may not be for them.

Like equinox said, if it was perfect, what would be the fun in it? If you don't hack and tinker with you're Linux box, than it's like windoze -- you don't learn anything!

Also, Fedora is as free as any OS, and whether Red Hat makes money or not isn't the point; you said yourself that you don't like beta testing for nothing, maybe the people at Red Hat don't like to work for nothing either. Can you blame them?

If you view your computer as nothing but a tool to get the job done, there's no reason why you shouldn't invest some money in its OS.

But there's nothing wrong with talking about the problems in an OS as long as it doesn't turn into a flame war.

-Tuxlover

this topic is very strange for me....
well I agree that openSSL should not have been included in that version BUT if you follow security issues you'll definitely notice the amount per week regarding linux distro whether fedora or not and not to mention UNIX or windows having on average similar amount (securityfocus, qualys, sans, etc.)

Summary of the vulnerabilities reported "this" week:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Platform # of Updates & Vulnerabilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Windows 1 (#3, #6, #8)
Third Party Windows Apps 6
Mac Os 2 (#4)
Linux 4
BSD 1
Unix 5 (#5)
Cross Platform 26 (#1, #2, #7)
Web Application 32
Network Device 3


I don't like to have to manually include the f***in' mp3-4 support but it's one line like mentioned above yum f***in' xmms-mp3|xine|xine-lib
I don't like mplayer so I'm DEFINITELY not disappointed it's not included
and also like mentioned above WTF do you expect for £ 0.00 ?!?
also are you people considering we are dealing with packages which could be automatically updated to more stable as soon as they pop-up in the repos?

can someone tell what should be this so discusses anti-DDOS openSSL version?
0.?.? s**t it starts with 0. in general this doesn't sound good to me

I just started using Fedora 3 and so far I like it quite a bit.

I do agree that there some issues with the install and I have a question (probably a dumb one, but I'm trying to step away from the Empire of Bill so give me a break).

I loaded Fedora from a DVD out of a LinuxUSER magazine. At the tail end of the install I am prompted to put in a LinuxEnterprise CD for the additional packages to be installed.

Since I don't have a copy of enterprise, what's the easiest (laziest, I suppose), method to get the packages installed? Many of the apps don't function (particularly media) and I'm assuming the reason stems from not having installed what I need.

Then again I may be wrong.

So can someone help a beginner out???

etruiii:

Never heard of that one happening...can you get the isos from the Fedora website? I had a similar problem with a book that I bought and I ended up ditching the book installation for something more complete, and have never been happier!

Thanks for the input. I will try out the ISO from the site.