Re: End of life for FC12?
ma, 2010-11-29 kello 01:13 +1030, Tim kirjoitti: > On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 20:52 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > I think the primary reason Windows users stay with Windows, even > > though they constantly complain about its shortcomings, is it's > > familiar, and they dread learning something different. > > Not to mention lock-in. You have this data that's only directly, or > practically, usable with your particular software. To change to another > OS, you have to transfer, and probably, convert your data, and that > process might be lossy/messy/lengthy/expensive. On practice there's a combination of the two above reasons. Windowz people are often asking "will it be possible to open all my stuff from documents? I have a bunch of word and excel documents on disk D:\..." And when hearing the answer the second reason appears the scene: "Uhh! You say openoffice? It's so unhandy!" And when I hearing it from scientific crowd (who have to write article, reports, these, etc.) I always ask them have they ever heard of LaTeX? It's a funny question because I work in a polymer industry :-) -- Linux: Where Don't We Want To Go Today? -- Submitted by Pancrazio De Mauro, paraphrasing some well-known sales talk -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 20:52 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I think the primary reason Windows users stay with Windows, even > though they constantly complain about its shortcomings, is it's > familiar, and they dread learning something different. Not to mention lock-in. You have this data that's only directly, or practically, usable with your particular software. To change to another OS, you have to transfer, and probably, convert your data, and that process might be lossy/messy/lengthy/expensive. -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 20:52 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I still have been unable to get an rational answer as to why Windows 7 > needs 20 GB(!) just to install. Never mind the applications. What > miraculous things does W7 do that it requires so much space? No > Windows user seems to know. Or care. Well, I don't care either, but > I do wonder. ;-) The short answer is that it doesn't. I have a Win7 VM in a 20GB image and 50% is free. That's with some apps and user files. The other answer is "because it can". 20GB is nothing these days. You might as well ask why it takes a machine faster than the fastest supercomputers of a couple of decades ago and with more RAM than total *disk space* of the mainframes of yesteryear just to run a single-user graphical desktop which spends well over 90% of its time doing absolutely nothing. As the saying goes: "Intel giveth and Microsoft taketh away". poc -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Thu, 11/25/10, James McKenzie wrote: > On 11/25/10 7:00 PM, Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > --- On Thu, 11/25/10, Bill Davidsen > wrote: > > > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: > >>> [snip] > >>> Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time > Support in > >> my next OS. > >> I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could > go to > >> better hardware and > >> FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one > application. I > >> know where you are > >> coming from. > > Sadly, people like us are nearly extinct. Today, > the self-esteem of the majority seems directly proportional > to the newness of want they own. > > > True. Or they are forced to buy new to 'keep up with > the Joneses'. Not Those types have always been around. Although, there's no "forcing" involved. It's a competitive, almost pathological, need, I think. Totally irrational. > a good place to be. I remember 'slow down' programs > when the higher > speed 386s were released so that the program would not run > stupidly fast. > > However, I believe that being a 'sheeple' is not the way to > go. Sure > Windows7 has some whiz-bang stuff in it, but I've been > enjoying the same > things with a Mac for years. I still have been unable to get an rational answer as to why Windows 7 needs 20 GB(!) just to install. Never mind the applications. What miraculous things does W7 do that it requires so much space? No Windows user seems to know. Or care. Well, I don't care either, but I do wonder. ;-) > The only thing that Linux has to overcome is people's fear > that they > will loose essential functionality by switching from > Windows to Linux. > I don't see this unless they are (stupidly) Access addicts > and that is > being addressed as well. I think the primary reason Windows users stay with Windows, even though they constantly complain about its shortcomings, is it's familiar, and they dread learning something different. Fear of the unknown is a pretty big phobia to overcome. The other reason is that few consumers have ever heard of Linux. They're not going to try it if they don't know it exists. It may run on their smartphone or multimedia appliance or the server that they stream the latest tunes or videos from, but they don't know that. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Andras Simon wrote: > On 11/25/10, Hiisi wrote: > >> To the topic: F12 seems to became more stable recently. My current >> uptime is 12 days, 14:55 which is remarkable for this specific >> configuration/hardware. > > [si...@pici dl]$ uptime > 01:23:47 up 309 days, 1:43, 7 users, load average: 0.26, 0.33, 0.27 > > On a puny netbook. Yes, F12 is pretty stable. > (I'm cheating a little, because this netbook goes to sleep every day. > But still...) Session time 20:02:09 on 11/26/10 www2:davidsen> uptime 20:02:18 up 1188 days, 2:36, 4 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 OS: KRUD - based on FC3 No cheat, UPS and standby generator at home. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Thu, 11/25/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen >> wrote: >>> Patrick Bartek wrote: > [snip] > > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" >> when it is installed and will be supported for those 5 years >> or so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of >> person. It matters little to me whether something is new or >> old as long as it works and satifies my requirements.) I >> wouldn't install, say, CentOS 5, on a new or old system >> today and not expect problems, either today or later. >> That's why I'm waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be >> released before doing anything to my current 4 year old >> system--Fedora 12 64-bit. > I will probably be using CentOS-5.5 or later until >> CentOS-7 comes out. RHEL6 is dropping xen, and the little utility boxes I seem >> to build for firewall or similar don't have HVM and can't support KVM. >> Hopefully xen will be back in mainline soon, and people will have a choice how >> they want to run things. >>> >>> I think you're SOL expecting XEN to be reinstated >> after being so resoundingly dropped in favor of KVM by >> Redhat. I vaguely remember reading a press release >> about it. >>> >>> Wait for CentOS 7? Going to be long wait. >> 5 years(?), at least. But patience _is_ a virtue. ;-) >>> >> If xen goes in mainline, and it is certainly on track to do >> so, then Fedora 15 >> (or 16 at the latest) may offer it again. It allows >> operation on processors >> which lack HVM, which is not only old gear (my Celeron >> systems and laptops), but >> alternate vendors, appliances, and misguided systems >> killing HVM in BIOS to meet >> MSFT license requirements. > > While trying to find the press release from RH about dropping XEN and why > (found this instead: > http://virtualization.info/en/news/2008/06/red-hat-adopts-kvm-what-happens-to-xen.html), > noted that RHEL 6 Final was release about 2 weeks ago, and the default > virtualization is KVM. Do you really think Red Hat is going to switch back > to XEN for 7 after all the work that went into finalizing 6? Of course, XEN > probably will be available as an alternative, but you'll have to recompile > the kernel. XEN is still listed in the F12 repo. > I don't think "switch back" is the right term, once the support is in mainline it becomes a few more builds in a sea of thousands, so it might be like PAE and non-PAE kernels. Having it allows use on additional machines, as the effort to have the capability goes down and the effort to remove or disable it goes up, the possibility goes up. There is a lot of stuff with a small user base in Fedora, and the users tend to be more diverse in their hardware (I'm being very polite here), so low effort support seems consistent with users vs. resources. And with all the effort which has gone into a better desktop, offering some solution to netbook users with no HVM has some justification. I have no crystal ball, but I own or support a fair number of netbooks. I have no thought that xen would continue as long as a custom kernel is needed, but once that's no longer the case, we'll see. >> Depending on what you run in a VM, there may be performance >> issues in xen vs >> HVM, harder to say with Linux, since it might run >> paravirtualized anyway. > > I used to run qemu and its accelerator load module with a stock kernel on a > 1GHz Duron machine with 1.5 GB RAM (Its max) in Slackware, Fedora Core 3, 4, > 5,& 6. It worked quite well, although, it wasn't in a server environment, > just experimentation. I hated having to multi-boot to test distros or run > Windows. To make a long story short, I never liked the way XEN was > implemented. > -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
pe, 2010-11-26 kello 08:49 -0800, Joe Zeff kirjoitti: > On 11/25/2010 11:57 PM, Hiisi wrote: > > However with buggy flash > > (random crashes that causes hangups of X server) and kernel updates > > (which is not so frequently near the EOL of F12) I had to reboot it or > > even hard reboot every 5-10 days. > > Odd. I only reboot my desktop for kernel updates and I can remember f > 12 having updates of literally biblical proportions. I don't remember having to hard reboot this machine this month. By I've switched to firefox 4 which is much more stable than previous versions. -- > 1. is qmail as secure as they say? Depends on what they were saying, but most likely yes. -- Seen on debian-devel -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Greg Woods wrote: > On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 11:07 -0800, Michael Miles wrote: > > >>> I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0 >> >> >> >> >> That's just too funny bro. >> I laughed my butt off. >> > http://www.indranet.com/potpourri/humor/girlfriend_upgrade.html > > :-) > > --Greg > > > Too funnyThanks for the laugh -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/2010 11:57 PM, Hiisi wrote: > However with buggy flash > (random crashes that causes hangups of X server) and kernel updates > (which is not so frequently near the EOL of F12) I had to reboot it or > even hard reboot every 5-10 days. Odd. I only reboot my desktop for kernel updates and I can remember f 12 having updates of literally biblical proportions. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/26/10 12:57 AM, Hiisi wrote: > to, 2010-11-25 kello 17:40 -0700, James McKenzie kirjoitti: >> Before the days of Linux, I had an OS/2 system that was up for two >> years. I had to shut it down to move it from the United States to >> Korea. It ran there for months and months. Not all Operating >> Systems >> are as unstable as Windows98 (it had the worst uptime that I know >> of.) >> I even ran a NetWare server that was up for six months (I crashed it >> running a backup, the tape drive was filthy and a bug in the backup >> program brought down the server.) >> >> James McKenzie > I didn't say that F12 or Linux in common is unstable. On the contrary, > I'm pretty sure we're on the right shore. My system serves as a router > for home network so it's up all the time. However with buggy flash > (random crashes that causes hangups of X server) and kernel updates > (which is not so frequently near the EOL of F12) I had to reboot it or > even hard reboot every 5-10 days. Ouch. Buggy systems are a bear to troubleshoot and maintain. I liked my uptime however. I have a Mac now and things have been getting stranger and stranger. It may be time to go ahead and refresh build it. May take care of the problems with Firefox locking the system from any inputs, which started with FF 3.5. James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 08:51 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> Not to beat a dead horse, but /usr/bin/fortune is not the source, it's
> simply a collection. The attribution even says "Unknown Source", which
> is what provoked my tongue-in-cheek reply, now ruined by having to
> explain it :-)
>
> poc
Yes, I understand it well ;-) About that phrase ("never trust an
operating system you don't have sources for"): I'm in a total agreement
with it!
--
A king's castle is his home.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 15:07 +0300, Hiisi wrote: > On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 07:05 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > > Never trust an aphorism you don't have the source for :-) > > -- Me > > > > poc > > ]$ which fortune > /usr/bin/fortune Not to beat a dead horse, but /usr/bin/fortune is not the source, it's simply a collection. The attribution even says "Unknown Source", which is what provoked my tongue-in-cheek reply, now ruined by having to explain it :-) poc -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 07:05 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > Never trust an aphorism you don't have the source for :-) > -- Me > > poc ]$ which fortune /usr/bin/fortune -- "It's ten o'clock... Do you know where your AI programs are?" -- Peter Oakley -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 26/11/2010 07:57, Hiisi wrote: > to, 2010-11-25 kello 17:40 -0700, James McKenzie kirjoitti: >> Before the days of Linux, I had an OS/2 system that was up for two >> years. I had to shut it down to move it from the United States to >> Korea. It ran there for months and months. Not all Operating >> Systems >> are as unstable as Windows98 (it had the worst uptime that I know >> of.) >> I even ran a NetWare server that was up for six months (I crashed it >> running a backup, the tape drive was filthy and a bug in the backup >> program brought down the server.) >> >> James McKenzie > This is all system and people dependent though. I've had windows servers running with no problems for months on end -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 10:57 +0300, Hiisi wrote: > Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) > -- Unknown source Never trust an aphorism you don't have the source for :-) -- Me poc -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
to, 2010-11-25 kello 17:40 -0700, James McKenzie kirjoitti: > Before the days of Linux, I had an OS/2 system that was up for two > years. I had to shut it down to move it from the United States to > Korea. It ran there for months and months. Not all Operating > Systems > are as unstable as Windows98 (it had the worst uptime that I know > of.) > I even ran a NetWare server that was up for six months (I crashed it > running a backup, the tape drive was filthy and a bug in the backup > program brought down the server.) > > James McKenzie I didn't say that F12 or Linux in common is unstable. On the contrary, I'm pretty sure we're on the right shore. My system serves as a router for home network so it's up all the time. However with buggy flash (random crashes that causes hangups of X server) and kernel updates (which is not so frequently near the EOL of F12) I had to reboot it or even hard reboot every 5-10 days. -- Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) -- Unknown source -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 11:07 -0800, Michael Miles wrote: > > I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) > > > > > > > > > -- > > > I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0 > > > > > That's just too funny bro. > I laughed my butt off. http://www.indranet.com/potpourri/humor/girlfriend_upgrade.html :-) --Greg -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10 7:00 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Thu, 11/25/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> [snip] >>> Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time Support in >> my next OS. >> I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to >> better hardware and >> FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I >> know where you are >> coming from. > Sadly, people like us are nearly extinct. Today, the self-esteem of the > majority seems directly proportional to the newness of want they own. > True. Or they are forced to buy new to 'keep up with the Joneses'. Not a good place to be. I remember 'slow down' programs when the higher speed 386s were released so that the program would not run stupidly fast. However, I believe that being a 'sheeple' is not the way to go. Sure Windows7 has some whiz-bang stuff in it, but I've been enjoying the same things with a Mac for years. The only thing that Linux has to overcome is people's fear that they will loose essential functionality by switching from Windows to Linux. I don't see this unless they are (stupidly) Access addicts and that is being addressed as well. So, on with Linux. James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Thu, 11/25/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > [snip] > > Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time Support in > my next OS. > > > I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to > better hardware and > FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I > know where you are > coming from. Sadly, people like us are nearly extinct. Today, the self-esteem of the majority seems directly proportional to the newness of want they own. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Thu, 11/25/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen > wrote: > > > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: > >>> [snip] > >>> > >>> That's okay as long as the OS is "current" > when it is > >> installed and will be supported for those 5 years > or > >> so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of > person. It > >> matters little to me whether something is new or > old as long > >> as it works and satifies my requirements.) I > wouldn't > >> install, say, CentOS 5, on a new or old system > today and not > >> expect problems, either today or later. > That's why I'm > >> waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be > released before > >> doing anything to my current 4 year old > system--Fedora 12 > >> 64-bit. > >>> > >> I will probably be using CentOS-5.5 or later until > CentOS-7 > >> comes out. RHEL6 is > >> dropping xen, and the little utility boxes I seem > to build > >> for firewall or > >> similar don't have HVM and can't support KVM. > Hopefully xen > >> will be back in > >> mainline soon, and people will have a choice how > they want > >> to run things. > > > > I think you're SOL expecting XEN to be reinstated > after being so resoundingly dropped in favor of KVM by > Redhat. I vaguely remember reading a press release > about it. > > > > Wait for CentOS 7? Going to be long wait. > 5 years(?), at least. But patience _is_ a virtue. ;-) > > > If xen goes in mainline, and it is certainly on track to do > so, then Fedora 15 > (or 16 at the latest) may offer it again. It allows > operation on processors > which lack HVM, which is not only old gear (my Celeron > systems and laptops), but > alternate vendors, appliances, and misguided systems > killing HVM in BIOS to meet > MSFT license requirements. While trying to find the press release from RH about dropping XEN and why (found this instead: http://virtualization.info/en/news/2008/06/red-hat-adopts-kvm-what-happens-to-xen.html), noted that RHEL 6 Final was release about 2 weeks ago, and the default virtualization is KVM. Do you really think Red Hat is going to switch back to XEN for 7 after all the work that went into finalizing 6? Of course, XEN probably will be available as an alternative, but you'll have to recompile the kernel. XEN is still listed in the F12 repo. > Depending on what you run in a VM, there may be performance > issues in xen vs > HVM, harder to say with Linux, since it might run > paravirtualized anyway. I used to run qemu and its accelerator load module with a stock kernel on a 1GHz Duron machine with 1.5 GB RAM (Its max) in Slackware, Fedora Core 3, 4, 5, & 6. It worked quite well, although, it wasn't in a server environment, just experimentation. I hated having to multi-boot to test distros or run Windows. To make a long story short, I never liked the way XEN was implemented. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
> On a puny netbook. Yes, F12 is pretty stable. > (I'm cheating a little, because this netbook goes to sleep every day. > But still...) > I found Fedora 12 very stable throughout its lifecycle, and enjoyable to use on my netbook (ASUS 1005HA). I skipped the 13 release and now have 14 on it, though I must say it does 'feel' a little slower. Other than that, I've had no issues with it. Take Care and Be Well, Landor -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10 5:29 PM, Andras Simon wrote: > On 11/25/10, Hiisi wrote: > >> To the topic: F12 seems to became more stable recently. My current >> uptime is 12 days, 14:55 which is remarkable for this specific >> configuration/hardware. > [si...@pici dl]$ uptime > 01:23:47 up 309 days, 1:43, 7 users, load average: 0.26, 0.33, 0.27 > > On a puny netbook. Yes, F12 is pretty stable. > (I'm cheating a little, because this netbook goes to sleep every day. > But still...) > Before the days of Linux, I had an OS/2 system that was up for two years. I had to shut it down to move it from the United States to Korea. It ran there for months and months. Not all Operating Systems are as unstable as Windows98 (it had the worst uptime that I know of.) I even ran a NetWare server that was up for six months (I crashed it running a backup, the tape drive was filthy and a bug in the backup program brought down the server.) James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10, Hiisi wrote: > To the topic: F12 seems to became more stable recently. My current > uptime is 12 days, 14:55 which is remarkable for this specific > configuration/hardware. [si...@pici dl]$ uptime 01:23:47 up 309 days, 1:43, 7 users, load average: 0.26, 0.33, 0.27 On a puny netbook. Yes, F12 is pretty stable. (I'm cheating a little, because this netbook goes to sleep every day. But still...) Andras -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10 3:46 PM, Hiisi wrote: > To the topic: F12 seems to became more stable recently. My current > uptime is 12 days, 14:55 which is remarkable for this specific > configuration/hardware. How long will it take for FC14 to become 'stable'. One of the reasons is that FC12 is nearing EOL thus no updates! James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10 11:50 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote: > If xen goes in mainline, and it is certainly on track to do so, then > Fedora 15 > (or 16 at the latest) may offer it again. It allows operation on processors > which lack HVM, which is not only old gear (my Celeron systems and laptops), > but > alternate vendors, appliances, and misguided systems killing HVM in BIOS to > meet > MSFT license requirements. > They are not misguided, just misinformed. Microsoft has been doing this for years (OS/2 anyone?) Microsoft wants to maintain their 'monopoly' over the desktop by any means they can. Sorry, but the EU has partially stepped up to the plate. They have to finish the job that the US Department of Justice is unwilling to do. > Depending on what you run in a VM, there may be performance issues in xen vs > HVM, harder to say with Linux, since it might run paravirtualized anyway. > Good to see that there are options. I use a Mac, people use and abuse Linux. May we always see an option. James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
to, 2010-11-25 kello 13:55 -0500, Bill Davidsen kirjoitti: > I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to better > hardware and > FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I know where you > are > coming from. > > I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) > I usually do yum update girlfriend. It produces a lot of warnings like "You're logged into reality as root user" but usually makes the trick. However it seems that this time I won't get away with it: yum list installed | grep wife wife.i686 1.0.beta.rc @rawhide To the topic: F12 seems to became more stable recently. My current uptime is 12 days, 14:55 which is remarkable for this specific configuration/hardware. -- damn my office is cold. need a hot secretary to warm it up. -- Seen on #Linux -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/10 12:07 PM, Michael Miles wrote: > Bill Davidsen wrote: > > >I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0 > > > That's just too funny bro. > I laughed my butt off. > > > > Don't let your 1.0 see that though > I'm on 2.0. 1.0 passed away. Nothing funny about that. However, I do stick with things that work. Wife 1.0 one week shy of 19 years. Wife 2.0 going on nine years. Thinkpad A22p is almost a decade old and may not be able to run FC14 (damn shame.) Macs from a Graphite Mac that is almost six years old (and on its second "hockey puck" power supply) to a MacBookPro Intel that was one of the first made. I move slowly and deliberately when I do things... James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/25/2010 10:55 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote: > I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to better hardware and > FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I know where you are > coming from. > > I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) I still have Win98 on this box and last time I tried, it booted. Granted, it took long enough that I remembered just why I switched to Linux, but it did manage to come up. I never went to any newer version of Gatesware because I dislike NotToday "technology." I don't like the way it works and, as I was considered a Windows Internals Geek back when I did tech support, I think I have good reasons. Be that as it may, I'm not posting to show off my advocacy. I use what works and, more and more, Linux Just Works. People ask when we'll have The Year Of The Linux Desktop; for me, it was several years ago. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Bill Davidsen wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > >> --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: >> >> >>> Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> >>> Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've >>> only upgraded with every third release--6-9-12. I >>> think it wasteful of time and energy to upgrade any >>> faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to >>> get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it >>> all and start anew with a new set of problems? No >>> thanks. >>> >>> I went from 6->13 on one machine, had some drivers for >>> custom hardware which new >>> driver models didn't support. Finally the USB passthru in >>> KVM got good enough to >>> run in a VM, and I do. >>> >> Custom hardware isn't required to have new release issues. Just older >> hardware is good enough, particularly peripherials. And they don't have to >> be that old. For example, my Samsung ML-1710 laser printer has been >> discontinued for 4 years or so. I bought mine in 2006. No problems. FC6's >> CUPS had the driver. So, did F9 when I upgraded to it a year or so later, >> but F12 didn't. Support had been dropped due to it being discontinued (I >> guess). Samsung's dedicated driver had problems with F12. Or, perhaps, it >> was the other way around. Fortunately, I was able to find a third party >> compatible driver through the LinuxPrinting site. >> >> Now, there is nothing wrong with the printer. I've used it daily in my >> business since I bought it. Have gone through 4 or 5 toner cartridges, and >> reams and reams of paper. One of these days, it will finally die and I'll >> replace it, but I resent having to replace something that works perfectly >> well simply because support has been dropped due solely to time and not lack >> of demand. >> >> Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time Support in my next OS. >> >> > I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to better hardware and > FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I know where you are > coming from. > > I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) > -- I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0 That's just too funny bro. I laughed my butt off. Don't let your 1.0 see that though Michael -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: >> >>> Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've >> only upgraded with every third release--6-9-12. I >> think it wasteful of time and energy to upgrade any >> faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to >> get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it >> all and start anew with a new set of problems? No >> thanks. >>> >> I went from 6->13 on one machine, had some drivers for >> custom hardware which new >> driver models didn't support. Finally the USB passthru in >> KVM got good enough to >> run in a VM, and I do. > > Custom hardware isn't required to have new release issues. Just older > hardware is good enough, particularly peripherials. And they don't have to > be that old. For example, my Samsung ML-1710 laser printer has been > discontinued for 4 years or so. I bought mine in 2006. No problems. FC6's > CUPS had the driver. So, did F9 when I upgraded to it a year or so later, > but F12 didn't. Support had been dropped due to it being discontinued (I > guess). Samsung's dedicated driver had problems with F12. Or, perhaps, it > was the other way around. Fortunately, I was able to find a third party > compatible driver through the LinuxPrinting site. > > Now, there is nothing wrong with the printer. I've used it daily in my > business since I bought it. Have gone through 4 or 5 toner cartridges, and > reams and reams of paper. One of these days, it will finally die and I'll > replace it, but I resent having to replace something that works perfectly > well simply because support has been dropped due solely to time and not lack > of demand. > > Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time Support in my next OS. > I stayed on FC4 for similar reasons, until I could go to better hardware and FC13, and I still run XP in a VM for one application. I know where you are coming from. I stay with things that work for me, I'm still on wife 1.0. ;-) -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > >> Patrick Bartek wrote: >>> [snip] >>> >>> That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is >> installed and will be supported for those 5 years or >> so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of person. It >> matters little to me whether something is new or old as long >> as it works and satifies my requirements.) I wouldn't >> install, say, CentOS 5, on a new or old system today and not >> expect problems, either today or later. That's why I'm >> waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be released before >> doing anything to my current 4 year old system--Fedora 12 >> 64-bit. >>> >> I will probably be using CentOS-5.5 or later until CentOS-7 >> comes out. RHEL6 is >> dropping xen, and the little utility boxes I seem to build >> for firewall or >> similar don't have HVM and can't support KVM. Hopefully xen >> will be back in >> mainline soon, and people will have a choice how they want >> to run things. > > I think you're SOL expecting XEN to be reinstated after being so resoundingly > dropped in favor of KVM by Redhat. I vaguely remember reading a press > release about it. > > Wait for CentOS 7? Going to be long wait. 5 years(?), at least. But > patience _is_ a virtue. ;-) > If xen goes in mainline, and it is certainly on track to do so, then Fedora 15 (or 16 at the latest) may offer it again. It allows operation on processors which lack HVM, which is not only old gear (my Celeron systems and laptops), but alternate vendors, appliances, and misguided systems killing HVM in BIOS to meet MSFT license requirements. Depending on what you run in a VM, there may be performance issues in xen vs HVM, harder to say with Linux, since it might run paravirtualized anyway. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Sun, 11/14/10, Lamar Owen wrote: > On Saturday, November 13, 2010 > 06:26:09 pm Patrick Bartek wrote: > > I've never demeaned Fedora. There are things I > don't like to be sure, but that can be said of all > things. I've been using it since FC3 after trying a > dozen or so other distros before settling on it as my > primary desktop OS. So that says something. And I'm > VERY particular. It's just that over the years > Fedora's development model and my needs have diverged. > And it's time to move on. > > I would recommend you take a look at a RHEL6 rebuild when > they become available. RHEL6 (and thus the rebuilds) > are based off of essentially F12 with some F13 stuff in > there, and you can then have the same setup for five > years. [snip] Both CentOS 6 and SL 6 are on my short list. As is Debian 6. Nothing else so far, but still investigating. > You will still be getting quarterly updates that can be > more major than you might think; Red Hat is very good about > backporting stuff, but every once in a while it becomes > necessary to do a version upgrade of some package, like > Firefox for one, that can cause more grief than you might > think. But, all in all, my experience running CentOS > (2.1, 3, 4, and 5) has been very smooth. Good to know. It seems that CentOS is much better supported than SL, too. (I guess those Fermi Lab guys have other things to do. ;-) ) However, SL seems noticeably faster than Cent. > [snip] The most > stable releases of Fedora have always seemed to be the ones > right before a new RHEL, and the least stable the ones right > after a new RHEL; this hasn't been true in a while, although > I'll have to admit that going from F8 to F9 tried my > patience; KDE 4 I really didn't need, I was productive in > KDE 3.5.10. Enough that I went Kubuntu 8.04 LTS for a > while, but after seeing that the grass wasn't any greener > (in fact, it was browner!) in Kubuntu-land came back with > F11, which seemed nice and solid. And there were quite > a few more than the previous three Fedora releases between > RHEL5 and RHEL6. I never liked Ubuntu: The way it was set up; the way it worked. And the color. Ugh! Bull shit brown. Awful. You only get one chance to make a good first impression. Ubuntu didn't. > And I'm now as productive in KDE 4 as I was in > 3.5.10. But it did take a while. I left KDE behind in favor of GNOME when I switched from Slackware to Fedora Core 3. Up until that time I found GNOME lacking in many ways except in RAM use and CPU cycles. I'm now looking at LXDE or just running OpenBox (or some other window manager) alone as an alternative to GNOME, but more testing is required. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > [snip] > > > > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is > installed and will be supported for those 5 years or > so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of person. It > matters little to me whether something is new or old as long > as it works and satifies my requirements.) I wouldn't > install, say, CentOS 5, on a new or old system today and not > expect problems, either today or later. That's why I'm > waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be released before > doing anything to my current 4 year old system--Fedora 12 > 64-bit. > > > I will probably be using CentOS-5.5 or later until CentOS-7 > comes out. RHEL6 is > dropping xen, and the little utility boxes I seem to build > for firewall or > similar don't have HVM and can't support KVM. Hopefully xen > will be back in > mainline soon, and people will have a choice how they want > to run things. I think you're SOL expecting XEN to be reinstated after being so resoundingly dropped in favor of KVM by Redhat. I vaguely remember reading a press release about it. Wait for CentOS 7? Going to be long wait. 5 years(?), at least. But patience _is_ a virtue. ;-) B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Sun, 11/14/10, Bill Davidsen wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've > only upgraded with every third release--6-9-12. I > think it wasteful of time and energy to upgrade any > faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to > get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it > all and start anew with a new set of problems? No > thanks. > > > I went from 6->13 on one machine, had some drivers for > custom hardware which new > driver models didn't support. Finally the USB passthru in > KVM got good enough to > run in a VM, and I do. Custom hardware isn't required to have new release issues. Just older hardware is good enough, particularly peripherials. And they don't have to be that old. For example, my Samsung ML-1710 laser printer has been discontinued for 4 years or so. I bought mine in 2006. No problems. FC6's CUPS had the driver. So, did F9 when I upgraded to it a year or so later, but F12 didn't. Support had been dropped due to it being discontinued (I guess). Samsung's dedicated driver had problems with F12. Or, perhaps, it was the other way around. Fortunately, I was able to find a third party compatible driver through the LinuxPrinting site. Now, there is nothing wrong with the printer. I've used it daily in my business since I bought it. Have gone through 4 or 5 toner cartridges, and reams and reams of paper. One of these days, it will finally die and I'll replace it, but I resent having to replace something that works perfectly well simply because support has been dropped due solely to time and not lack of demand. Another reason, I'm looking for Long Time Support in my next OS. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Gordon Messmer wrote: > >> On 11/09/2010 07:35 PM, Patrick >> Bartek wrote: >>> I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's >> fast release >>> cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my >> personal systems to last >>> about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as >> needed. I'd >>> like the OS last that long, too. >> ... >>> 5 along with CentOS and >>> Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly >> based on FC6. >> >> If you want your OS to last 5 to 7 years, your package >> version are going >> to be old. To paraphrase Babbage, I am not able >> rightly to apprehend >> the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such >> requirements. > > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is installed and will be > supported for those 5 years or so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of person. > It matters little to me whether something is new or old as long as it works > and satifies my requirements.) I wouldn't install, say, CentOS 5, on a new > or old system today and not expect problems, either today or later. That's > why I'm waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be released before doing > anything to my current 4 year old system--Fedora 12 64-bit. > I will probably be using CentOS-5.5 or later until CentOS-7 comes out. RHEL6 is dropping xen, and the little utility boxes I seem to build for firewall or similar don't have HVM and can't support KVM. Hopefully xen will be back in mainline soon, and people will have a choice how they want to run things. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've only upgraded with > every third release--6-9-12. I think it wasteful of time and energy to > upgrade any faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to get > everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it all and start anew with a > new set of problems? No thanks. > I went from 6->13 on one machine, had some drivers for custom hardware which new driver models didn't support. Finally the USB passthru in KVM got good enough to run in a VM, and I do. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Saturday, November 13, 2010 06:26:09 pm Patrick Bartek wrote: > I've never demeaned Fedora. There are things I don't like to be sure, but > that can be said of all things. I've been using it since FC3 after trying a > dozen or so other distros before settling on it as my primary desktop OS. So > that says something. And I'm VERY particular. It's just that over the years > Fedora's development model and my needs have diverged. And it's time to move > on. I would recommend you take a look at a RHEL6 rebuild when they become available. RHEL6 (and thus the rebuilds) are based off of essentially F12 with some F13 stuff in there, and you can then have the same setup for five years. Now, when the time does come to upgrade to, say CentOS 7, you will have a much harder time of it. But if you like what you have, and you're used to the Fedora tools and setup, either CentOS 6 or Scientific Linux 6, both in the early stages of building, should fit your bill. SL6 is already available in a 'pre-alpha' form; the pre-alpha meaning that, while the upstream source packages are stable, the process and binaries built may not be. You will still be getting quarterly updates that can be more major than you might think; Red Hat is very good about backporting stuff, but every once in a while it becomes necessary to do a version upgrade of some package, like Firefox for one, that can cause more grief than you might think. But, all in all, my experience running CentOS (2.1, 3, 4, and 5) has been very smooth. The old Red Hat Linux advice was always 'skip the X.0 release, test the X.1 release, use the X.2 release' but then 7 came along (which most everybody called 7.0), 7.3 came along (which to many people, was not as stable as 7.2 had been), 8.0 came along, and then there was 9. The most stable releases of Fedora have always seemed to be the ones right before a new RHEL, and the least stable the ones right after a new RHEL; this hasn't been true in a while, although I'll have to admit that going from F8 to F9 tried my patience; KDE 4 I really didn't need, I was productive in KDE 3.5.10. Enough that I went Kubuntu 8.04 LTS for a while, but after seeing that the grass wasn't any greener (in fact, it was browner!) in Kubuntu-land came back with F11, which seemed nice and solid. And there were quite a few more than the previous three Fedora releases between RHEL5 and RHEL6. And I'm now as productive in KDE 4 as I was in 3.5.10. But it did take a while. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Little niggle with a preupgraded F13->F14 (was:Re: End of life for FC12?)
On Saturday, November 13, 2010 06:40:03 pm Kevin Fenzi wrote: > I almost never have issues on os upgrades anymore. The last 2 machines > here I upgraded from 13->14 just worked. I didn't have to change > anything at all. I had my first issue with such this cycle; F12->F13 on this box went well, but I hit a snag with this one, but it was somewhat my own doing. I had forgotten that I had moodle installed, and, a while back, moodle kept failing to upgrade during yum updates. Since I wasn't actively using it, I didn't file a bug report at the time. I had intended to remove moodle (and all my PlanetCCRMA packages that don't have upgrades yet to F14), but forgot to do so. Made a really good learning opportunity! The moodle issue threw Anaconda for a loop, and generated a fatal error during package install (it looks like a corrupt package during execution). This was about 85% through the upgrade. I should really do a scratch F13 install, install moodle, do the preupgrade, and see if I can duplicate so I can file a proper bugzilla report; I just simply was in a rush. But the tools yum provides were able to fix the issue, but I did have to boot using the F13 kernel, since the initramfs for the F14 kernel wasn't there. One niggle: yum-complete-transaction didn't see any incomplete transactions, but there was one from Anaconda. Like I said, I need to file a complete report. And next time be more diligent. In a nutshell, "package-cleanup --cleandupes" then "yum update", then I removed all but the currently running F13 kernel, and then reinstalled the F14 kernel, and rebooted into the F14 kernel. And the box is running fine. In the old days this would have been a reinstall, but the yum tools have really gotten robust. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 23:41:31 -0500 > Bill Davidsen wrote: > >> It is a general Fedora problem, not hardware related. If you have a >> laptop connected with WiFi and mount an NFS volume, on resume it >> tries to use NFS before the network is up. Then the mount goes away. >> I see it on every laptop and have for years. > > try: > > echo 'NETWORKWAIT=yes'>> /etc/sysconfig/network > > The problem is that NetworkManager just brings up network as it can, > and nothing waits for it by default. If you set the above it should > wait until there is a Network that comes up before NetworkManager lets > the next thing resume. > Since I have the laptops I shall try this at a time when it's not time critical, in case it doesn't work. The thing is that I have the feeling that the problem predates NetworkMangler. Still a helpful idea. >>> You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose. >>> >> Worth trying Ubuntu, friend says it works. Costs nothing to try ;-) > If true, I wonder why they would default to "have a network before you use it" mode and Fedora doesn't. Was someone at Fedora overly concerned about coming back from suspend and fast boot times? NOTE: that's really a question, not a criticism, yet. It seems as though the network restart and all the things using the network would be in a thread and serialized, so other things don't get help up if they don't need the network. I don't usually suspend servers, but it might be interesting to see if a hardwired NIC comes up fast enough to avoid a similar problem. > Suit yourself. ;) > > kevin > -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
On 11/12/2010 05:41 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > I would never consider using Fedora on a system where security was paramount. > That's why I only use it on my home desktop systems. > > And what do you use instead? I have never had a security problem with Fedora. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Sat, 11/13/10, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > ...snip... > > > Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used > to be longer and > > not on a strict schedule as it is now. A new > version was released > > when it was ready. Fedora now has become a rapid > release test bed, > > an eternal beta if you will, and we are the > testers. But that's > > okay, since the "good" stuff eventually gets into RHEL > and its clones > > making them more stable and more secure with a longer > life. > > While it wasn't quite exactly 6months, it was pretty close. > > See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linux#Version_history I never used RH Linux. The project was merged with Fedora about 2 years before I first installed Fedora Core 3. Although, I was aware of FC1 & 2, they seemed to have too many problems to be considered. As I remember releases from then were semi-regular from 5 months to 7 or 8. I think when Fedora Core was renamed Fedora with version 7 that a 6 month release cycle was decided as being optimum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedora_(operating_system)#Version_history > ...snip... > > > Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do > on this list > > just means additional headaches and work of a couple > months of fixing > > the problems with the "new" OS when the "old" one was > running just > > fine, but is fast approaching "unsupported." > This is my major > > "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only upgrade > every third > > release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm > considering > > switching to a long term support version of Linux, > whatever that may > > be. > > I almost never have issues on os upgrades anymore. The last > 2 machines > here I upgraded from 13->14 just worked. I didn't have > to change > anything at all. I avoided the upgrade process when I was installing every release, because at the time (FC3-6), it was at best problematical, and only did clean installs for that reason. After 6, I started installing only every third release, so true upgrading was impossible. It seems that Fedora with the preupgrade utility has made the process much more reliable. However, it still doesn't work across more than one release number at a time, i.e. 12->13, 13->14 and not 12->14. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 23:41:31 -0500 Bill Davidsen wrote: > It is a general Fedora problem, not hardware related. If you have a > laptop connected with WiFi and mount an NFS volume, on resume it > tries to use NFS before the network is up. Then the mount goes away. > I see it on every laptop and have for years. try: echo 'NETWORKWAIT=yes' >> /etc/sysconfig/network The problem is that NetworkManager just brings up network as it can, and nothing waits for it by default. If you set the above it should wait until there is a Network that comes up before NetworkManager lets the next thing resume. > > You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose. > > > Worth trying Ubuntu, friend says it works. Costs nothing to try ;-) Suit yourself. ;) kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Fri, 11/12/10, Tom H wrote: > Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > > I never said that nor was it my intention to imply > that. All I said was in the 10 > > years of using Linux none of my systems were ever > hacked or infected. I never > > said I didn't check my system. I do. Daily. > Automatically. Cron-jobs. Plus, > > manual checks--logs and what-nots--periodically. > Sometimes the first indicator > > that something may (not is) wrong is the way the > system runs and performs: > > the little things that someone who doesn't use the > system daily wouldn't notice. > > No one can say that he/she's never been hacked. You can > only say that > you've never seen any sign of proof that you've been > hacked... Such a scenerio--leaving no trace of an intrusion--I think highly improbable. > How would you know what being hacked might feel lie if > you've never been hacked? I've seen it on other computers as well as studied ways it's done. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 15:26:09 -0800 (PST) Patrick Bartek wrote: ...snip... > Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used to be longer and > not on a strict schedule as it is now. A new version was released > when it was ready. Fedora now has become a rapid release test bed, > an eternal beta if you will, and we are the testers. But that's > okay, since the "good" stuff eventually gets into RHEL and its clones > making them more stable and more secure with a longer life. While it wasn't quite exactly 6months, it was pretty close. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Linux#Version_history ...snip... > Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do on this list > just means additional headaches and work of a couple months of fixing > the problems with the "new" OS when the "old" one was running just > fine, but is fast approaching "unsupported." This is my major > "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only upgrade every third > release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm considering > switching to a long term support version of Linux, whatever that may > be. I almost never have issues on os upgrades anymore. The last 2 machines here I upgraded from 13->14 just worked. I didn't have to change anything at all. ..snip... > I've never demeaned Fedora. There are things I don't like to be > sure, but that can be said of all things. I've been using it since > FC3 after trying a dozen or so other distros before settling on it as > my primary desktop OS. So that says something. And I'm VERY > particular. It's just that over the years Fedora's development model > and my needs have diverged. And it's time to move on. Sorry to hear it, but I understand your reasoning. ;) I hope you will think fondly of Fedora and look and see how we are doing from time to time. ;) Good luck. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Fri, 11/12/10, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 11/12/2010 08:31 AM, Patrick > Bartek wrote: > > > > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is > installed and > > will be supported for those 5 years or so. > > I understand that, but you will never find that to be the > case on a > sustained basis unless you schedule your hardware purchases > to coincide > with OS releases. By "current" OS, I don't mean one newly released the same day the system is built, but one that is from the "era" of the hardware's manufacture. I don't (and never) use cutting edge hardware. As far as Linux is concerned, that's asking for problems. I make sure all my system hardware has been on the market for at least 6 months. That way, the Linux community has had time to write drivers, "fix" code, etc. > You said that you were tiring of > Fedora's release > cycle, but that release cycle is the only way to give users > an OS that > is "current" given that those millions of users are going > to continue > buying hardware in the periods between long-term > releases. Fedora's release cycles when it was Fedora Core used to be longer and not on a strict schedule as it is now. A new version was released when it was ready. Fedora now has become a rapid release test bed, an eternal beta if you will, and we are the testers. But that's okay, since the "good" stuff eventually gets into RHEL and its clones making them more stable and more secure with a longer life. Anyway, in my case, once I build a system, it pretty much doesn't change--hardware-wise--during its life. So, I have no need need for fast release cycles to keep up with cutting edge hardware. Now I may upgrade a CPU or add a another hard drive or install a new graphics card because the orginal one died, but none of that requires upgrading to a newer OS version, or at least, it shouldn't. Also, upgrading Fedora every 6 months or so as most do on this list just means additional headaches and work of a couple months of fixing the problems with the "new" OS when the "old" one was running just fine, but is fast approaching "unsupported." This is my major "problem" with Fedora, and mostly why I only upgrade every third release--Why make more work for myself?--and why I'm considering switching to a long term support version of Linux, whatever that may be. Now I'm not lobbying for Fedora to change its ways. Although, there was some discussion months ago about "why not make Fedora a rolling release?". I'm just saying that its "ways" no longer fulfill my needs. And that's one of the reasons I use Linux: a multitude of options. (If I used Windows or OSX, there would be no option.) > It's > certainly legitimate to choose the long-term release > (RHEL/CentOS/Scientific Linux), but I'd hope that you'd > recognize the > value that Fedora provides to its users and avoid demeaning > it for its > strength. I've never demeaned Fedora. There are things I don't like to be sure, but that can be said of all things. I've been using it since FC3 after trying a dozen or so other distros before settling on it as my primary desktop OS. So that says something. And I'm VERY particular. It's just that over the years Fedora's development model and my needs have diverged. And it's time to move on. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Clemens Eisserer wrote: > Hi, > >> Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions and >> updated >> to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be ignored for another >> year. >> I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working resume after suspend, so I may just >> convert all my laptops to something which has a clue. > > Thats the reason I don't file any bugs at fedora's bugzilla anymore. > Its just a huge waste of time, the only one ever looking at it is the > EOL-Daemon closing it when the version reported against goes into EOL > status. > That hasn't been my experience, I've had bugs fixed, good questions, etc. But the the NFS problem, people mark it DUPLICATE, and NOTCONFIRM, and every other thing, but no one has ever said it worked for them or confirmed it, so I suspect no one even tried. They just see suspend and write it off. We tried at a user group meeting and it failed on seven systems (100%). -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 18:56:33 -0500 > Bill Davidsen wrote: > >> Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions >> and updated to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be >> ignored for another year. > > The recent activity on f12 bugs would not (yet) close them. > It asks "Hey, does this still happen? do you have more info? Does it > occur on new versions too? Can you update the bug?" > > Only if you don't add any info in the next month will it get closed. > >> I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working >> resume after suspend, so I may just convert all my laptops to >> something which has a clue. > > I don't think there is any linux distro on the planet that can say it > has suspend and resume working for all hardware that exists. > > If you describe the specific hardware and steps you have taken, we can > see if there's a way to work around or fix it for your hardware. > It is a general Fedora problem, not hardware related. If you have a laptop connected with WiFi and mount an NFS volume, on resume it tries to use NFS before the network is up. Then the mount goes away. I see it on every laptop and have for years. > You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose. > Worth trying Ubuntu, friend says it works. Costs nothing to try ;-) > kevin > -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I never said that nor was it my intention to imply that. All I said was in > the 10 > years of using Linux none of my systems were ever hacked or infected. I never > said I didn't check my system. I do. Daily. Automatically. Cron-jobs. > Plus, > manual checks--logs and what-nots--periodically. Sometimes the first > indicator > that something may (not is) wrong is the way the system runs and performs: > the little things that someone who doesn't use the system daily wouldn't >notice. No one can say that he/she's never been hacked. You can only say that you've never seen any sign of proof that you've been hacked... How would you know what being hacked might feel lie if you've never been hacked? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/12/2010 08:31 AM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is installed and > will be supported for those 5 years or so. I understand that, but you will never find that to be the case on a sustained basis unless you schedule your hardware purchases to coincide with OS releases. You said that you were tiring of Fedora's release cycle, but that release cycle is the only way to give users an OS that is "current" given that those millions of users are going to continue buying hardware in the periods between long-term releases. It's certainly legitimate to choose the long-term release (RHEL/CentOS/Scientific Linux), but I'd hope that you'd recognize the value that Fedora provides to its users and avoid demeaning it for its strength. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
--- On Thu, 11/11/10, James Mckenzie wrote: > Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > > >--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon > wrote: > > > [massive snip] > >> I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected > >> Windows machines that I've > >> gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. > >> It's not a definitive feeling, > >> just an indicator to start checking for something > >> wrong. > >> > >> > >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > > > >Why would you think I am? > > > There are 'stealth' infections that only appear when > triggered. Several of the 'bots function that > way. You get the spyware infection that downloads an > appropriate payload into a known good directory. Your > system is added to the list of known systems. It sends > out an ack/syn/ack pattern when you boot up and connect to > the Internet on a known 'good' port (nothing like the 37733 > port that is blocked by just about everyone.) It sits > and waits. You would only become aware when the 'bot > fires and then it is too late. That is why there are > such things as rootkit hunters and spyware applications for > Linux. However, it is your choice not to use > them. I do. As with any new malware, no one knows about it until it's too late and the damage is done. All you can do is take precautions and handle the consequences when the precautions prove inadequate, as they sometimes are. I don't know why some people here got the impression that just because I said none of my systems have ever been hacked or infected, I don't take security precautions on them. I do. Daily scans, firewalls, check logs, etc. etc. I'm just not paranoid about it. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
--- On Thu, 11/11/10, James Mckenzie wrote: > Tim > > > >On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 10:36 -0800, Patrick Bartek > wrote: > >> Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd > application behavior, > >> no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no > excessive or > >> abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes > or freezes, no > >> strange log reports, no reports from friends about > receiving spam > >> e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. > >> > >> I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected > Windows machines that > >> I've gotten a "feel" for when something is > amiss. It's not a > >> definitive feeling, just an indicator to start > checking for something > >> wrong. > > > >I've seen comments made that the usual things you > notice with a hacked > >Windows installation (where it's horribly sluggish and > unstable), really > >only apply to Windows. Not to mention that an > un-hacked, but otherwise > >crappily maintained, Windows box behaves just the > same. > > > Tim, Patrick, et. al.: > > These are all valid points. I've said that Fedora is > 'beta' software in the past. Every effort is made by I would never consider using Fedora on a system where security was paramount. That's why I only use it on my home desktop systems. > [big snip] > > Lastly, there are two types of people in the security > realm: > 1. Those who have not been breached and will. > Those people tend to say "I'm lucky and I'm not going to > improve my security posture." This includes malware > infections (viruses, spyware and worms.) > 2. Those have been breached and now look like an > armoured tank. I'm the latter. I have anti-virus > software on my MacIntosh (there is ONE known in the wild > virus/worm for the MacOSX platform), anti-spyware on my > browser and other items (firewalls/ipfilters). I was > struck by the MonkeyB worm from a supposedly active system > with anti-virus installed (but disabled.) Virus > infections can and do come from everywhere. There is a third type who falls between 1 and 2, (1.666 ;-)). He knows there's a devil, but still takes a reasonable, not excessive or paranoid, security approach based on what needs to be secured, its value, and the extint of the exposure. I fall in that group. For the paranoid treatment of security, this was worthwhile. It gave me a headache. ;-). This is Revision 4. September 2010. http://www.nsa.gov/ia/_files/os/redhat/rhel5-guide-i731.pdf B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
-- On Thu, 11/11/10, Andras Simon wrote: > On 11/11/10, Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon > wrote: > > > >> [snip] > >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > > > > Why would you think I am? > > I'm no expert on intrusion detection, but I'm pretty sure > that it > involves much more than gut feelings. A clever cracker will > make sure > that you don't experience "the usual indicators". I run daily cron-jobs, check logs, etc., too, but being familiar with how a system performs is important. Abnormal performance is a first indicator that something may be wrong. It does not necessarily mean a virus, etc., but it would make me start checking for a cause. > Anyway, even if you use eol'd Fedoras (and I must admit, I > do, too), > you should probably not let sensitive data (credit card > numbers and > such) anywhere near it. I never do. Or have. I don't even store e-mail addresses or log-on info for secured sites like banks, businesses, etc. that I need to access. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Thu, 11/11/10, Tim wrote: > On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 10:36 -0800, > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd > application behavior, > > no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no > excessive or > > abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes or > freezes, no > > strange log reports, no reports from friends about > receiving spam > > e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. > > > > I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected > Windows machines that > > I've gotten a "feel" for when something is > amiss. It's not a > > definitive feeling, just an indicator to start > checking for something > > wrong. > > I've seen comments made that the usual things you notice > with a hacked > Windows installation (where it's horribly sluggish and > unstable), really > only apply to Windows. Not to mention that an > un-hacked, but otherwise > crappily maintained, Windows box behaves just the same. > > Having your Linux box re-tasked to do a lot of work would > probably be > noticeable, but a hacked box might be abused in other (low > load) ways, > and you might be the sleeping zombie, waiting to be > used. Or simply the > anon proxy for one nefarious person, who doesn't do a lot > of their > illegal actions, but enough that you don't want to be held > responsible > for. > > And I'd be inclined to think that if someone was going to > use you as a > spam server, they'd probably be using their own list of > recipients and > random "from" addresses. > > I don't think it's that likely that you'd be crash happy > with a hacked > Linux computer. Crashing is in Window's nature. > It's more than happy > for the whole thing to come down in a mess, rather than > just the errant > program. I'd expect a bad program trying to be > naughty on Linux to be > the thing that crashed, while the rest of the computer kept > on going. > It certainly behaves that way when normal programs screw > up. > > So, I wouldn't say "I don't think anybody could have hacked > me, and I'm > not going to check." I never said that nor was it my intention to imply that. All I said was in the 10 years of using Linux none of my systems were ever hacked or infected. I never said I didn't check my system. I do. Daily. Automatically. Cron-jobs. Plus, manual checks--logs and what-nots--periodically. Sometimes the first indicator that something may (not is) wrong is the way the system runs and performs: the little things that someone who doesn't use the system daily wouldn't notice. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Gordon Messmer wrote: > On 11/09/2010 07:35 PM, Patrick > Bartek wrote: > > I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's > fast release > > cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my > personal systems to last > > about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as > needed. I'd > > like the OS last that long, too. > ... > > 5 along with CentOS and > > Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly > based on FC6. > > If you want your OS to last 5 to 7 years, your package > version are going > to be old. To paraphrase Babbage, I am not able > rightly to apprehend > the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such > requirements. That's okay as long as the OS is "current" when it is installed and will be supported for those 5 years or so. (I'm not a cutting edge type of person. It matters little to me whether something is new or old as long as it works and satifies my requirements.) I wouldn't install, say, CentOS 5, on a new or old system today and not expect problems, either today or later. That's why I'm waiting for CentOS 6 or Debian 6, etc. to be released before doing anything to my current 4 year old system--Fedora 12 64-bit. However, nothing has been written in stone. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
Around 06:29pm on Thursday, November 11, 2010 (UK time), Michael Miles scrawled: > That is what I am asking. Do I need a double firewall or would the > router be enough.? The benefit that I can see would be the computer not > having to actually do firewall duties and being a little bit quicker > because of it. Especially with torrents. I imagine the speed of your torrents is governed by your internet connection, not the effort your PC needs to put in to run iptables. In any event I would keep the firewall running, unless there is a good reason not to (and it doesn't seem you have one). Steve -- Website: www.stevesearle.com Twitter: @ReddishShift Facebook: www.facebook.com/steve.searle 19:08:53 up 7:33, 1 user, load average: 0.47, 0.12, 0.03 pgpRMS9tBJGPI.pgp Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
Joe Zeff wrote: > On 11/11/2010 09:16 AM, Michael Miles wrote: > >> I have been thinking of completely disabling my firewall since I do not >> have any computers connected to this computer. >> >> Is this a safe practice or am I setting myself up for intrusion? >> > Why would you want to? What benefit do you expect? > That is what I am asking. Do I need a double firewall or would the router be enough.? The benefit that I can see would be the computer not having to actually do firewall duties and being a little bit quicker because of it. Especially with torrents. I don't really know!!! -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
On 11/11/2010 09:16 AM, Michael Miles wrote: > I have been thinking of completely disabling my firewall since I do not > have any computers connected to this computer. > > Is this a safe practice or am I setting myself up for intrusion? Why would you want to? What benefit do you expect? -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
James Mckenzie wrote: > Tim > >> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 10:36 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> >>> Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd application behavior, >>> no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no excessive or >>> abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no >>> strange log reports, no reports from friends about receiving spam >>> e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. >>> >>> I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected Windows machines that >>> I've gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. It's not a >>> definitive feeling, just an indicator to start checking for something >>> wrong. >>> >> I've seen comments made that the usual things you notice with a hacked >> Windows installation (where it's horribly sluggish and unstable), really >> only apply to Windows. Not to mention that an un-hacked, but otherwise >> crappily maintained, Windows box behaves just the same. >> >> > Tim, Patrick, et. al.: > > These are all valid points. I've said that Fedora is 'beta' software in the > past. Every effort is made by RedHat and the Fedora Project to insure that > your system is stable, secure and safe. However, there may be an unknown > 'Zero Day' exploit or other security issue. These exist throughout all > operating systems, not just Linux. Information security should be an ONGOING > task. You, as the system administrator, should know what is 'normal' for > your system as far as CPU usage, memory usage and running processes. > Crackers will attempt to hide their activity, but if you know the normal > indicators, you can discover them and remove/disable software installed by > them. > > One of the key provisions of good systems security is never to run > unmaintained and unmaintainable software. When FC12 goes EOL and no longer > receives security updates, it is time to update. FC14 has issues, as does > software that is 'bleeding edge' but it is not a bad idea to update to FC13 > until the 'bugs' are worked out. > > Also, internal and external security software (read Firewalls, IDS/IPS) can > be 'hacked' and rendered ineffective and thus should also not be relied upon. > > Lastly, there are two types of people in the security realm: > 1. Those who have not been breached and will. Those people tend to say "I'm > lucky and I'm not going to improve my security posture." This includes > malware infections (viruses, spyware and worms.) > 2. Those have been breached and now look like an armoured tank. I'm the > latter. I have anti-virus software on my MacIntosh (there is ONE known in > the wild virus/worm for the MacOSX platform), anti-spyware on my browser and > other items (firewalls/ipfilters). I was struck by the MonkeyB worm from a > supposedly active system with anti-virus installed (but disabled.) Virus > infections can and do come from everywhere. > > Folks, please employ best security practices in your everyday computing. The > computer data you may save may be your own. Windows is NOT the only platform > with nasties, just the most popular. > > James McKenzie > SSCP 367830 (yes, I'm a trained and certified security pro with lots of > experience) > > - Also, internal and external security software (read Firewalls, IDS/IPS) can be 'hacked' and rendered ineffective and thus should also not be relied upon. I have been behind a router for the life of this computer and I have not had any problems with Fedora 12 being infected in any way. Can't say the same for my Win 7 installation on a Virtual Machine. Does being behind the router make intrusion just harder or does it protect my machine better than say just a firewall with lots of rule sets? I have been thinking of completely disabling my firewall since I do not have any computers connected to this computer. Is this a safe practice or am I setting myself up for intrusion? Michael -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
Patrick Bartek wrote: > >--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > [massive snip] >> I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected >> Windows machines that I've >> gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. >> It's not a definitive feeling, >> just an indicator to start checking for something >> wrong. >> >> >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > >Why would you think I am? > There are 'stealth' infections that only appear when triggered. Several of the 'bots function that way. You get the spyware infection that downloads an appropriate payload into a known good directory. Your system is added to the list of known systems. It sends out an ack/syn/ack pattern when you boot up and connect to the Internet on a known 'good' port (nothing like the 37733 port that is blocked by just about everyone.) It sits and waits. You would only become aware when the 'bot fires and then it is too late. That is why there are such things as rootkit hunters and spyware applications for Linux. However, it is your choice not to use them. I do. James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
Tim > >On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 10:36 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: >> Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd application behavior, >> no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no excessive or >> abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no >> strange log reports, no reports from friends about receiving spam >> e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. >> >> I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected Windows machines that >> I've gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. It's not a >> definitive feeling, just an indicator to start checking for something >> wrong. > >I've seen comments made that the usual things you notice with a hacked >Windows installation (where it's horribly sluggish and unstable), really >only apply to Windows. Not to mention that an un-hacked, but otherwise >crappily maintained, Windows box behaves just the same. > Tim, Patrick, et. al.: These are all valid points. I've said that Fedora is 'beta' software in the past. Every effort is made by RedHat and the Fedora Project to insure that your system is stable, secure and safe. However, there may be an unknown 'Zero Day' exploit or other security issue. These exist throughout all operating systems, not just Linux. Information security should be an ONGOING task. You, as the system administrator, should know what is 'normal' for your system as far as CPU usage, memory usage and running processes. Crackers will attempt to hide their activity, but if you know the normal indicators, you can discover them and remove/disable software installed by them. One of the key provisions of good systems security is never to run unmaintained and unmaintainable software. When FC12 goes EOL and no longer receives security updates, it is time to update. FC14 has issues, as does software that is 'bleeding edge' but it is not a bad idea to update to FC13 until the 'bugs' are worked out. Also, internal and external security software (read Firewalls, IDS/IPS) can be 'hacked' and rendered ineffective and thus should also not be relied upon. Lastly, there are two types of people in the security realm: 1. Those who have not been breached and will. Those people tend to say "I'm lucky and I'm not going to improve my security posture." This includes malware infections (viruses, spyware and worms.) 2. Those have been breached and now look like an armoured tank. I'm the latter. I have anti-virus software on my MacIntosh (there is ONE known in the wild virus/worm for the MacOSX platform), anti-spyware on my browser and other items (firewalls/ipfilters). I was struck by the MonkeyB worm from a supposedly active system with anti-virus installed (but disabled.) Virus infections can and do come from everywhere. Folks, please employ best security practices in your everyday computing. The computer data you may save may be your own. Windows is NOT the only platform with nasties, just the most popular. James McKenzie SSCP 367830 (yes, I'm a trained and certified security pro with lots of experience) -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
On 11/11/10, Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > >> >> [snip] >> >> How do you know you haven't been infected or >> hacked? >> >> (I don't doubt that you do, just curious about >> how.) >> > >> > Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd >> application behavior, no >> > unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no >> excessive or abnormal net (or >> > hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no >> strange log reports, no >> > reports from friends about receiving spam e-mails from >> me that I never sent, >> > etc. >> > >> > I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected >> Windows machines that I've >> > gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. >> It's not a definitive feeling, >> > just an indicator to start checking for something >> wrong. >> > >> >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > > Why would you think I am? I'm no expert on intrusion detection, but I'm pretty sure that it involves much more than gut feelings. A clever cracker will make sure that you don't experience "the usual indicators". Anyway, even if you use eol'd Fedoras (and I must admit, I do, too), you should probably not let sensitive data (credit card numbers and such) anywhere near it. Andras -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 10:36 -0800, Patrick Bartek wrote: > Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd application behavior, > no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no excessive or > abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no > strange log reports, no reports from friends about receiving spam > e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. > > I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected Windows machines that > I've gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. It's not a > definitive feeling, just an indicator to start checking for something > wrong. I've seen comments made that the usual things you notice with a hacked Windows installation (where it's horribly sluggish and unstable), really only apply to Windows. Not to mention that an un-hacked, but otherwise crappily maintained, Windows box behaves just the same. Having your Linux box re-tasked to do a lot of work would probably be noticeable, but a hacked box might be abused in other (low load) ways, and you might be the sleeping zombie, waiting to be used. Or simply the anon proxy for one nefarious person, who doesn't do a lot of their illegal actions, but enough that you don't want to be held responsible for. And I'd be inclined to think that if someone was going to use you as a spam server, they'd probably be using their own list of recipients and random "from" addresses. I don't think it's that likely that you'd be crash happy with a hacked Linux computer. Crashing is in Window's nature. It's more than happy for the whole thing to come down in a mess, rather than just the errant program. I'd expect a bad program trying to be naughty on Linux to be the thing that crashed, while the rest of the computer kept on going. It certainly behaves that way when normal programs screw up. So, I wouldn't say "I don't think anybody could have hacked me, and I'm not going to check." -- [...@localhost ~]$ uname -r 2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686 Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I read messages from the public lists. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
On 11/11/2010 04:20 PM, Hiisi wrote: >> > Because it is whole lot of "fun" to play the speculation game Some >> > people have too much time on their hands >> > >> > > I think this question shouldn't be associated only with someone's > speculation or paranoia. This is a typical entries from logwatch reports > on my machine: My response was only meant for the single instance in the thread. -- No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it. -- C. Schulz 葛斯克 愛德華 / 台北市八德路四段 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
to, 2010-11-11 kello 14:28 +0800, Ed Greshko kirjoitti: > On 11/11/2010 02:19 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > > > >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > > Why would you think I am? > > > > > Because it is whole lot of "fun" to play the speculation game Some > people have too much time on their hands > > I think this question shouldn't be associated only with someone's speculation or paranoia. This is a typical entries from logwatch reports on my machine: - pam_unix Begin dovecot: Authentication Failures: web6p5 rhost=178.77.68.97 : 242 Time(s) web7p1 rhost=178.77.68.97 : 239 Time(s) web6p4 rhost=178.77.68.97 : 238 Time(s) web6p3 rhost=178.77.68.97 : 235 Time(s) web6p2 rhost=178.77.68.97 : 232 Time(s) . sshd: Authentication Failures: unknown (mail.access350.co.ke): 845 Time(s) root (222.33.56.100): 800 Time(s) vsftpd: Authentication Failures: Administrator rhost=ns.medicalyohin.com : 2283 Time(s) admin rhost=ns.medicalyohin.com : 2283 Time(s) Password Failures: user unknown: 4566 Time(s) Also there's a lot of 404-error messages from httpd, when somebody (something?) looked for mysql or phpmyadmin web-cinfiguration: - httpd Begin .. //php-my-admin/config/config.inc.php?p=phpinfo(); . When I first saw it all I was scared that occasionally THEY will guess root passwd and will take control over my machine. So, I did a bit of modification of stock configuration (i.e. ssh root login is now forbidden, every user on the system has strong passwd, phpmyadmin is uninstalled, system is always up-to-date and so on). Probably I should also configure rkhunter or sshd to allow only 3 authentication failures before blacklisting the intruder IP. Anyway, this topic is not a joke! THEY ARE hunting for us! -- Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) -- Unknown source -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/09/2010 07:35 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's fast release > cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my personal systems to last > about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as needed. I'd > like the OS last that long, too. ... > 5 along with CentOS and > Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly based on FC6. If you want your OS to last 5 to 7 years, your package version are going to be old. To paraphrase Babbage, I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such requirements. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
On 11/11/2010 02:19 PM, Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > >> I hope that you're not deluding yourself... > Why would you think I am? > > Because it is whole lot of "fun" to play the speculation game Some people have too much time on their hands -- Jesuit priests are DATING CAREER DIPLOMATS!! 葛斯克 愛德華 / 台北市八德 路四段 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Never Hacked or Infected--Yet (Was: Re: End of life for FC12?)
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > >> [snip] > >> How do you know you haven't been infected or > hacked? > >> (I don't doubt that you do, just curious about > how.) > > > > Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd > application behavior, no > > unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no > excessive or abnormal net (or > > hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no > strange log reports, no > > reports from friends about receiving spam e-mails from > me that I never sent, > > etc. > > > > I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected > Windows machines that I've > > gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. > It's not a definitive feeling, > > just an indicator to start checking for something > wrong. > > > > I hope that you're not deluding yourself... Why would you think I am? B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/10/2010 09:14 AM, Clemens Eisserer wrote: > Hi, > >> Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions and >> updated >> to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be ignored for another >> year. >> I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working resume after suspend, so I may just >> convert all my laptops to something which has a clue. > > Thats the reason I don't file any bugs at fedora's bugzilla anymore. > Its just a huge waste of time, the only one ever looking at it is the > EOL-Daemon closing it when the version reported against goes into EOL > status. Or this little gem where the developer looked at it, agreed that it didn't work, and basically said, "This is the way I've done it for *15 years*, and I'm not going to change just because something about it doesn't work. I think we should wait for the kernel to change and accept the way my code works. Bug CLOSED WORKSFORTHEONLYCASEICAREABOUT." https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=563267 I've opened it again, which will probably get me into Karel's killfile. -- Bob Nichols "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address. Do NOT delete it. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/10/10, Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > > >> On 11/10/10, Patrick Bartek >> wrote: >> >> > I'm not running a server with the need for up-to-date >> security, but a >> > personal desktop that has more that sufficient >> security. After 10 years of >> > using various versions of Linux, I've yet to be >> infected or hacked. So, I >> > must be doing something right. I ran FC6 for >> almost a year past EOL before >> > finally upgrading to 9. Never had any problems. >> >> How do you know you haven't been infected or hacked? >> (I don't doubt that you do, just curious about how.) > > Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd application behavior, no > unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no excessive or abnormal net (or > hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no strange log reports, no > reports from friends about receiving spam e-mails from me that I never sent, > etc. > > I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected Windows machines that I've > gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. It's not a definitive feeling, > just an indicator to start checking for something wrong. > I hope that you're not deluding yourself... Andras -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Andras Simon wrote: > On 11/10/10, Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > > I'm not running a server with the need for up-to-date > security, but a > > personal desktop that has more that sufficient > security. After 10 years of > > using various versions of Linux, I've yet to be > infected or hacked. So, I > > must be doing something right. I ran FC6 for > almost a year past EOL before > > finally upgrading to 9. Never had any problems. > > How do you know you haven't been infected or hacked? > (I don't doubt that you do, just curious about how.) Lack of the usual indicators, that is, no odd application behavior, no unusual slow-downs, no excessive CPU usage, no excessive or abnormal net (or hard drive) activity, no crashes or freezes, no strange log reports, no reports from friends about receiving spam e-mails from me that I never sent, etc. I've spent enough time fixing friends' infected Windows machines that I've gotten a "feel" for when something is amiss. It's not a definitive feeling, just an indicator to start checking for something wrong. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Hi, > Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions and updated > to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be ignored for another > year. > I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working resume after suspend, so I may just > convert all my laptops to something which has a clue. Thats the reason I don't file any bugs at fedora's bugzilla anymore. Its just a huge waste of time, the only one ever looking at it is the EOL-Daemon closing it when the version reported against goes into EOL status. - Clemens -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi said: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 20:00:00 -0600 > Chris Adams wrote: > > I know suspend/resume is "hard", but in nearly a year, I've never even > > had a response to my BZ (548593) about my Dell Optiplex 740 not > > suspending (it hangs and never turns off). Every few months, I report > > that the latest kernel still fails in the same way. > > Well, a few places to start: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KernelCommonProblems Been there - that's why I tried the pm_trace bit (which doesn't seem to be giving anything useful). > What video driver there? xorg-x11-drv-ati (radeon RV610 / HD 2400 PRO) > Does it suspend ok from a text boot/session? I tried booting with "3 nomodeset". If I run "pm-suspend", the screen clears, the network stops, but I'm left with a blinking cursor in the upper left corner. Alt-SysRq doesn't do anything, so it appears dead. I have to power-cycle it twice to get it to come back. I unloaded a bunch of modules (KVM, floppy, parallel port) first as well and got the same result. The pm_trace thing this time showed: pci :00:0f.0: hash matches which is: 00:0f.0 IDE interface: nVidia Corporation MCP51 Serial ATA Controller (rev a1) I've added this info to the BZ as well. -- Chris Adams Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/10/10, Patrick Bartek wrote: > I'm not running a server with the need for up-to-date security, but a > personal desktop that has more that sufficient security. After 10 years of > using various versions of Linux, I've yet to be infected or hacked. So, I > must be doing something right. I ran FC6 for almost a year past EOL before > finally upgrading to 9. Never had any problems. How do you know you haven't been infected or hacked? (I don't doubt that you do, just curious about how.) Andras -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On 11/10/2010 09:49 AM, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: > I'm noticed, when trying upgrade from F11 to F14, this combination isn't > supported, anaconda refuse it - to F14 is upgrade possible only from F12 > or F13. As I usually do fresh install, I not know exactly in which > Fedora version was this restriction introduced, but I am certain this > must occur not long ago - older Fedora distros make possible upgrade > almost without restriction, from any previous version. This is because of a change in RPM (switching to LZMA compression) Rahul -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
-- On Tue, 11/9/10, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote: > Patrick Bartek wrote: > > > > [snip] > > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've > only upgraded with every third release--6-9-12. I > think it wasteful of time and energy to upgrade any > faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to > get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it > all and start anew with a new set of problems? No > thanks. > > I'm noticed, when trying upgrade from F11 to F14, this > combination isn't > supported, anaconda refuse it - to F14 is upgrade possible > only from F12 > or F13. As I usually do fresh install, I not know exactly > in which > Fedora version was this restriction introduced, but I am > certain this > must occur not long ago - older Fedora distros make > possible upgrade > almost without restriction, from any previous version. A poor choice of words on my part. I "upgraded" to the new versions by clean installs and not by the upgrade process you are referring to. I NEVER "upgrade" versions even if it's only one version number. I ALWAYS do clean installs. Less problems. Less headaches. Although, the upgrade process is getting better, less problematical. When it can upgrade across any number of versions without failure, I'll consider using the process, but for now . . . Clean installs only for me. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Tue, 11/9/10, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:35:33 -0800 > (PST) > Patrick Bartek > wrote: > > > Just because it's EOL doesn't mean it stops working on > that date, > > too. ;-) > > Sure. The way people talk about EOL, you'd think that it did. Stop working, that is. > > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've > only upgraded > > with every third release--6-9-12. I think it > wasteful of time and > > energy to upgrade any faster. It takes almost > the 6 month release > > cycle to get everything working smoothly anyway. > Then chuck it all > > and start anew with a new set of problems? No > thanks. > > Note however that when a release goes end of life you no > longer get ANY > updates from Fedora (including security updates). This > makes your > machine more and more vulnerable over time. Also, you may > be told in > various support forums to upgrade if you run into issues. I'm not running a server with the need for up-to-date security, but a personal desktop that has more that sufficient security. After 10 years of using various versions of Linux, I've yet to be infected or hacked. So, I must be doing something right. I ran FC6 for almost a year past EOL before finally upgrading to 9. Never had any problems. > > I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's > fast release > > cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my > personal systems to last > > about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as > needed. I'd > > like the OS last that long, too. My current > system is only 4 years > > old and has already had 3 versions of Fedora on it. > > Take a look at RHEL or CentOS then. I have (See following quoted paragraph). I'm waiting for the Final release. > > I've looked at the beta of RHEL 6, which seems to be > based on F12/13, > > and it's "current" enough for my needs. (5 along > with CentOS and > > Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly > based on FC6.) > > So, when the new RHEL is release, about a month later, > I'll take a > > look at CentOS 6, and go from there. > > Note that if you installed rhel5 when it came out it would > be about 3.5 > years old. You say above you want 5-7 years, so toward the > end of that > cycle it's going to be old software. ;) That's okay. The hardware's going to be old, too. I would just like an OS I can install when I build a system, and not have to install another until I build another system. Simple. Efficient. Cost effective. FWIW, I considered Rolling Releases, but that comes with its own set of problems. Mainly, hardware incompatibilities after a time. > > Of course, there's always Debian 6.0. ;-) It's > in Beta now. Stable > > should be out Februaryish. Or March. Or > April. With Debian, you > > can never tell. > > Use what you like. ;) I always do, regardless of consensus. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Patrick Bartek wrote: > --- On Tue, 11/9/10, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > >> On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:23:30 -0600 >> Robert Moskowitz >> wrote: >> >>> Per: >>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html >>> >>> "Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until >> approximately one >>> month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance >> schedule of" >>> Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project >> wiki." >>> >>> I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it >> doesn't seem dead >>> yet... >> >> Fedora 12's end of life is 2010-12-02. >> >> You have until then to look at upgrading to f13/f14. ;) > > Just because it's EOL doesn't mean it stops working on that date, too. ;-) > > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've only upgraded with > every third release--6-9-12. I think it wasteful of time and energy to > upgrade any faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to get > everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it all and start anew with a > new set of problems? No thanks. I'm noticed, when trying upgrade from F11 to F14, this combination isn't supported, anaconda refuse it - to F14 is upgrade possible only from F12 or F13. As I usually do fresh install, I not know exactly in which Fedora version was this restriction introduced, but I am certain this must occur not long ago - older Fedora distros make possible upgrade almost without restriction, from any previous version. Franta Hanzlik -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:35:33 -0800 (PST) Patrick Bartek wrote: > Just because it's EOL doesn't mean it stops working on that date, > too. ;-) Sure. > Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've only upgraded > with every third release--6-9-12. I think it wasteful of time and > energy to upgrade any faster. It takes almost the 6 month release > cycle to get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it all > and start anew with a new set of problems? No thanks. Note however that when a release goes end of life you no longer get ANY updates from Fedora (including security updates). This makes your machine more and more vulnerable over time. Also, you may be told in various support forums to upgrade if you run into issues. > I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's fast release > cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my personal systems to last > about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as needed. I'd > like the OS last that long, too. My current system is only 4 years > old and has already had 3 versions of Fedora on it. Take a look at RHEL or CentOS then. > I've looked at the beta of RHEL 6, which seems to be based on F12/13, > and it's "current" enough for my needs. (5 along with CentOS and > Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly based on FC6.) > So, when the new RHEL is release, about a month later, I'll take a > look at CentOS 6, and go from there. Note that if you installed rhel5 when it came out it would be about 3.5 years old. You say above you want 5-7 years, so toward the end of that cycle it's going to be old software. ;) > Of course, there's always Debian 6.0. ;-) It's in Beta now. Stable > should be out Februaryish. Or March. Or April. With Debian, you > can never tell. Use what you like. ;) kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
--- On Tue, 11/9/10, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:23:30 -0600 > Robert Moskowitz > wrote: > > > Per: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html > > > > "Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until > approximately one > > month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance > schedule of" > > Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project > wiki." > > > > I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it > doesn't seem dead > > yet... > > Fedora 12's end of life is 2010-12-02. > > You have until then to look at upgrading to f13/f14. ;) Just because it's EOL doesn't mean it stops working on that date, too. ;-) Since FC6 (I've been using Fedora since Core 3), I've only upgraded with every third release--6-9-12. I think it wasteful of time and energy to upgrade any faster. It takes almost the 6 month release cycle to get everything working smoothly anyway. Then chuck it all and start anew with a new set of problems? No thanks. I've gotten to the point where I'm tiring of Fedora's fast release cycle. I need a longer life OS. I build my personal systems to last about 5 to 7 years with periodic hardware upgrades as needed. I'd like the OS last that long, too. My current system is only 4 years old and has already had 3 versions of Fedora on it. I've looked at the beta of RHEL 6, which seems to be based on F12/13, and it's "current" enough for my needs. (5 along with CentOS and Scientific Linux versions are too old being seemingly based on FC6.) So, when the new RHEL is release, about a month later, I'll take a look at CentOS 6, and go from there. Of course, there's always Debian 6.0. ;-) It's in Beta now. Stable should be out Februaryish. Or March. Or April. With Debian, you can never tell. B -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Tue, 9 Nov 2010 20:00:00 -0600 Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi said: > > If you describe the specific hardware and steps you have taken, we > > can see if there's a way to work around or fix it for your > > hardware. > > I know suspend/resume is "hard", but in nearly a year, I've never even > had a response to my BZ (548593) about my Dell Optiplex 740 not > suspending (it hangs and never turns off). Every few months, I report > that the latest kernel still fails in the same way. Well, a few places to start: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KernelCommonProblems What video driver there? Does it suspend ok from a text boot/session? You are using gnome-power-manager? Does it work with 'pm-suspend'? kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi said: > If you describe the specific hardware and steps you have taken, we can > see if there's a way to work around or fix it for your hardware. I know suspend/resume is "hard", but in nearly a year, I've never even had a response to my BZ (548593) about my Dell Optiplex 740 not suspending (it hangs and never turns off). Every few months, I report that the latest kernel still fails in the same way. -- Chris Adams Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 18:56:33 -0500 Bill Davidsen wrote: > Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions > and updated to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be > ignored for another year. The recent activity on f12 bugs would not (yet) close them. It asks "Hey, does this still happen? do you have more info? Does it occur on new versions too? Can you update the bug?" Only if you don't add any info in the next month will it get closed. > I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working > resume after suspend, so I may just convert all my laptops to > something which has a clue. I don't think there is any linux distro on the planet that can say it has suspend and resume working for all hardware that exists. If you describe the specific hardware and steps you have taken, we can see if there's a way to work around or fix it for your hardware. You're of course welcome to use whatever distro you choose. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
James Mckenzie wrote: > Robert Moskowitz wrote: >> >> Per: >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html >> >> "Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until approximately one >> month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance schedule of" >> Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project wiki." >> >> I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it doesn't seem dead yet... >> > Probably the end of November is when you should expect to see updates to FC12 > end. Might be the end of December if the number of reported problems is high. > Yes, I'm getting WONTFIX on the problem I reported in old versions and updated to 12, I will report it again against 14 so it can be ignored for another year. I'm told Ubuntu and SuSE have working resume after suspend, so I may just convert all my laptops to something which has a clue. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:23:30 -0600 Robert Moskowitz wrote: > Per: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html > > "Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until approximately one > month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance schedule of" > Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project wiki." > > I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it doesn't seem dead > yet... Fedora 12's end of life is 2010-12-02. You have until then to look at upgrading to f13/f14. ;) kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Re: End of life for FC12?
Robert Moskowitz wrote: > >Per: >https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html > >"Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until approximately one >month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance schedule of" >Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project wiki." > >I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it doesn't seem dead yet... > Probably the end of November is when you should expect to see updates to FC12 end. Might be the end of December if the number of reported problems is high. James McKenzie -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
End of life for FC12?
Per: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/announce/2010-June/002830.html "Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until approximately one month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance schedule of" Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project wiki." I did get an update to fuse for FC12 sunday, so it doesn't seem dead yet... -- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
