Fedora 11 Alpha questions, and Linux distro choice

Hello,

I am in the process of installing Fedora on another HDD than Ubuntu, and dual boot between them. Installing Nvidia driver in VirtualBox was a mess (X was not starting anymore). I remember to have encountered such problem with Ubuntu as well, when virtualized some things won't work.

Coincidently, at work we are thinking about having an homogeneous Linux server pool, instead of actually various distro as well as OpenBSD. It won't be started tomorrow, but I will keep en eye on CentOS and Fedora. Co-workers really want the GUI installed and started, guess I'll either have to fight them to death (just kiding!) or accept it

I have read about Bastille for Ubuntu, but while it could be worthwhile, it is not natively included and handled by Ubuntu apparently, and I don't know if the stability would be affected or not. Something to test, but I cannot test everything at once

Regards,
gkweb.

 

No hardware driver will work in a virtual environment. The host system ALWAYS controls the hardware. That doesn't mean the visual effects won't work but you'll need the Guest Additions, if you are using Vbox, for that.

But as a general rule, no virtual guest has any control over hardware. It makes no difference what Video card your computer has, the guest OS sees a "virtual card" provided by the virtual software.

You might as well be trying to use nVidia drivers with an ATI card.

 

Thanks for the information, I should have read Mrk's guide more.

Posting this from Fedora. It takes much more time to setup the same things (just installed Truecrypt and Keepass only...). I will keep you informed.

Regards,
gkweb.

 

"lo
While were on Fedora: can anyone fix the choppy Flash play in Fedora (and for that matter SUSe) on VMware ??
Both install great; then fiddle fiddle..

just a little precis:
@gkweb
As a very basic end user who is prepared to do some cli work and does not need server set-ups, dont really care re desktop pizazz ( although liking Oz-Os interface ): e-mail vids, some music, office stuff, browsing: BASIC:

The CentOs gui is plain and useable, as a desktop: system is rock solid and stable for me. In fact a bit boring
Those guys do a great job.
The remodelling of the great Redhat implies a long life for CentOs releases to come.
Cutting edge and fiddling aint really my idea of fun.
I can do all I want in CentOs and as an option with 'extensions' as required

Apart from the "Ubuntu base type" (Mint, Xubuntu ; i know Deb base) distros I'm a little tired of constant tweaks required to make some of the "cutting edge" distros meet my needs on a desktop.
I've tried Sidux and Debian but just find too much required and atm I'm not up to it.
Gentoo:way too tricky for me atm.
Mepis fits the needs but some turmoil recently: now possibly resolved for WW as new release nearly ready.
PCLOS updated now: still a great desktop system and new '2009' on the blocks.
Got tired of dependency issues in Slack ergo: Wolvix Still have no issues with Wolvix 1.1; as a two man operation expectations cannot be too high re new release schedule and packages, but coming..
Vector: very nice.
Zenwalk another great customised slackware option.

Mandriva 2009 has been good to me, some signs of renovations underway with biz model.

Really wanted to get along with PCBSD and DesktopBSd but required too much input and cannot get some basic utilities set-up.

Arch i liked from scratch but got a bit lost in: LOL even with the wiki , have high hopes for chakra project but maybe loonngg way to go there.

Absolute as a niche release : nice

Plenty of scope there without too much configing
Be interesting to see where/how the latest devt of "auto xorg.config" without xorg file goes/takes us.

Nothing really new from me

Edit: interesting how centOs as a desktop pops up more often; go Ocky

 

Something new :
I've revisited SuSE 11 as a desktop and found it to be very satisfactory indeed.
Fwiw; there seems to be some inceasing momentum behind SuSE.
Comments ?

 

SuSE 11 is very nice, it's probably my #2 or #3 pick after Ubuntu. It took a tweak or two more than Ubuntu for me, but it wasn't hard at all, in fact, it's pretty easy to set up overall. Has a nice polished look n feel IMO. I prefer the KDE desktop in this one.

I don't know about momentum, or whether it can challenge Ubuntu, but it's right up there at the top IMO.

 

Hello,

Below is my experience on Fedora 10 64bits after 7 days of daily usage.

Issues encountered (all fixed)
- black grub screen
- desktop effect cannot be enabled (nvidia driver correctly installed)
- truecrypt was a pain to compile, no Fedora package available, lot of dependencies
- Evolution mail client provided without the anti-spam bogofilter plugin by default (unlike Ubuntu)
- Compiz very slow when 3D windows effect enabled (not fixed)
- PulseAudio nightmare, sound crakling (spent hours on trying many solutions)
- default NetworkManager interface couldn't be modified or disabled/deleted (DHCP searching for a long time before giving up and starting my added connection)
- Screenlets hard to find, had to rely on an unofficial repository found on the english forum from one of the mods or admin
- by default, America's Army game slower than in Ubuntu, but might be the driver being different (180.25)

To sume it up, a lot more manual fixes and tweaking were required compared to Ubuntu. That was expected, but the PulseAudio issue really got me aggravated.

However, now that eveything is configured, I really enjoy using it
I like the default extra security and am learning SELinux to see what I can do with Firefox, if I can play a little with it.

The update manager is nice, you can only apply security fixes and not add corrective packages, can be usefull for a server for instance. I'm considering testing Fedora 10 on a server, which would not require all of these manual tweaking (no need to play movies or games, or to surf the web).

I've successfully backed it up on another HDD by booting on my Acronis TrueImage 2009 boot CD.

At the end, all I can say is that in my opinion, Fedora is not meant for beginners, as many things have to be done in command line. While I really like it, I find Ubuntu far easier to use. Both distro are very great, but despite the issues encountered, I don't know why but my heart seems to go more toward Fedora (the booting animated solar theme is beautiful )

Regards,
gkweb.

 

You're not alone
BIG BIG P-I-T-A
Enough reason to wipe Fedora for me as simple end user.
Sort of a shame , I too liked some of the finer config options, but life is too short..and other great options available

 

Wow, all I can say is, you have a lot more patience than I nowadays.... But good show, after all that work you are then rewarded with a nice system.

 

I will repeat at the cost of being redundant, Ubuntu today is the Windows of Linux world, it may not be the fastest or cutting edge but it works out of the box, is supported quite well, is patched fast and is quite stable as well with minimal issues present out of the box. Its also easy to install and upgrade and can be customized well. Fedora has come a long way and today its far more friendlier and less hard core but still has a long way to go before it comes close to Ubuntu's overall friendliness.

 

You'll upset everybody...


But: it is an accurate observation of current circumstances: start with the Interesting Interlopers: like what you see: get really interested: do the rounds of other distros: find limitations re time, effort, and patience: get dragged back for the righteous oob experience with all the new gained knowledge and confidence.
Can always go back or forward on the circle of Linux.

 

I am well aware of that but its the same Linux purists who have been hindering the popularity of Linux distros among Windows user. If you make it cutting edge and hardcore, I got news for them, Linux will cease to exist and only those who like CLI will be able to run Linux. That certainly would not be good for those who are tired of paying high cost of software and hardware upgrades, viruses, spywares etc. AV, HIPS and would like to switch to Linux for peace of mind. Distros like SuSE, Ubuntu, PCLOS, MEPIS, Sidux etc as well as Sabayon have made many Windows user endear themselves to Linux and we have to thank them for that. Of course, for purists Linux will continue having hardcore choices of Mandriva, Gentoo, Debian etc. and they can customize it and run any way they like it. Thats the beauty of Linux, they have one to suit every state of mind.

 

Super Ubuntu is even better IMO.

 

I will agree with that whole-heartedly. The real joy of Linux is its diversity. If you want to be a "purist" who uses the CLI routinely, then choose a distro that you can 'tweak" till your heart's content. But for those who just want to get out from under MS's thumb there are distros that don't require use of the CLI at all once the system is setup. And very little CLI to get them setup.

For the "purist" to belittle those users is harmful to the overall Linux community.

 

It is and I wholeheartedly recommend it to all first timers but sadly, there is no x64 edition out yet.

 

Would first timers even know the difference? I've have run 64bit and 32bit versions of 8.10 and really couldn't see any significant difference except that 64 tends to have more compatibility issues.

 

A couple months ago I tried the top 6 (DistroWatch) that had Live CDs.

The only one that recognized my wireless OOTB was OpenSUSE.

Thats what I dual booted on my Vista laptop. I was never able to sort out the choppy video playback. Seems there are no good Linux drivers for an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600. In fact thats what messed up my OpenSUSE install. Me mucking about & trying to install some other drivers. Finally just wiped it & am licking my wounds.

So does anybody know of a distro with a LiveCD that works well OOTB with my Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN & has good drivers (no choppy playback) for my ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600?

 

Your best bet on the ATI drivers is to get them off the ATI site and install manually. That's what I do, and it always works best. I see there are ATI drivers for the ATI Radeon HD 2600, if that's what you have. But I don't see the 2600 in the Mobility section.

Some things may not work on the live cd, but when installed, you can add your own drivers as needed, where you can't on a live cd.

 

That's the problem. AFAIK there are no drivers for my specific Graphics that will deliver a seamless nonchoppy playback of videos in Linux.

 

My experience with Linux video tells me that it's a bit choppy no matter what you do.... compared to Win anyway... but I do get pretty good results now with the ATI drivers I use.

 

I have a ATI4850 dual GPU card and I always use ATI drivers from their site and not repos, I never have any choppy playback issues, infact, full screen movies play better than my Windows installation. I don't do games so can't say anything but in terms of video loading and playback, Ubuntu is excellent.

 

Actually, in Linux I don't think it has anything to do with the graphics drivers, I think it's more a case of bad streaming and/or bad codecs...

 

Very true, there have been some flaky graphics driver in the past but the latest ones have minimal video issues. The other issue is that most default install of Flash etc. till today prefer Gnome, you can do it in KDE but then it would need extra steps for it. Most default Linux installs use Gnome for one reason only, its the stability factor. Of course, those who want the latest will hop for KDE.

 

Hello,

quoting myself :

To make Compiz cube rotation a lot smoother, and be able to enable 3D windows effect without sluggishness, I have enabled the "loose binding" Compiz option.

It works great with my NVIDIA card.

Regards,
gkweb.

 

Some recent developments with video drivers :
Tricky.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzEwMg