digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Fedora 9 Sulphur Released!

get.fedoraproject.org — KDE4, persistent USB key support, updated packages, FreeIPA support are just a few of the major changes in this release. Get it while its hot!

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • WebSmith, on 05/13/2008, -1/+25I've been running the preview of Fedora 9 on several machines (including my desktop and MacBook Pro laptop), and it's been rock solid. I've been running the bleeding edge Red Hat/Fedora releases since RH 4.2, and this is by far the best release I have ever seen.
    • techmaster, on 05/13/2008, -15/+1Do they call it sulphur because it stinks?
    • pelman, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Thanks for the review on this. Was getting Kubuntu because I'm sick of XP but used Fedora before and this really set me off to get it.
  • doDugg, on 05/13/2008, -1/+31Work perfectly. My First Fedora 9 Screenshot (with Fluxbox) :
    http://screenshot.planet-libre.org/albums/Fluxbox/ ...
  • Nushio, on 05/13/2008, -17/+2Make Waves
  • Nushio, on 05/13/2008, -18/+4Make Waves
  • utore, on 05/13/2008, -2/+7Downloading the iso now to run in vbox? How does it look so far?
    • rahulsundaram, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Pretty good I would say ;-)
    • Twee, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2I had a lot of trouble trying to get Fedora 9 preview running in VirtualBox a week ago. The guest additions won't install because the version of X11 is too new and basically beta.
  • gregdek, on 05/13/2008, -0/+17If you're running F7 or F8, give the new Preupgrade feature a try. No downloading ISOs, no downtime for your box. Just run preupgrade which will download all of the new packages and anaconda in the background, and then you'll be ready to reinstall. Check the Fedora Planet or google "fedora preupgrade" for more info.
    • lynx44, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2That sounds awesome. Has anyone tried this yet? How well does it work? I've never had an upgrade work on Fedora (from a burned ISO)
    • mooninite, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3There's a few bugs in preupgrade that people might run into. Beware: this is an alpha software. Preupgrade is *brand new* so yes, they'll be a few things that need fixing. Check the Red Hat bugzilla for more info.
    • ianweller, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0i'm still working on downloading the packages, but i'll post here once i finish installing, which at the current rate looks like tomorrow :D

      if it works, it'll be a lot better than starting over from scratch, though
  • Gurpartap, on 05/13/2008, -1/+6wooooooooooohuuuuuuuu
    i'm passing 70% of 3.3G from an "unprotected" mirror. started downloading hours before it released! sadly slow connection :x
    • hoodedrobin, on 05/13/2008, -8/+2Yeah thats the issue I have with fedora. Yum is slow as hell, and it takes too long to download the iso.

      I use ubuntu and its easy and works with all my hardware out of the box which for some reason fedora likes to get mad at. And dont get me wrong I am not a linux newbie I run a osx hackintosh and used to run gentoo but why spend the time messing with gentoo installs when ubuntu works just as well and saves me time. I mean is it really worth the 4.1 seconds of difference loading a working desktop I think not.

      (I also run smoothwall(before that I had a bsd based router), vista 64, xp, and windows 2k and 2003 server)
    • ufia, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Did you wait in line at 2am in front of an Apple store?
      • hoodedrobin, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2No I downloaded kalyway osx and installed it... for free.
    • Adam420, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3the newest version is 3.63 GB, old one is 3.3 GB
  • xenocoder, on 05/13/2008, -3/+11Very nice, trying all the major releases but have to say this blows the brown right out of the water... Yum seems quicker
    • rahulsundaram, on 05/13/2008, -2/+7Yep. Fedora look and feel out of the box is way nicer. Yum performance is remarkably better.
    • bejayel, on 05/13/2008, -2/+5I have never had a good experience with fedora when compared to any other distrobution. My first experience, fedora kept changing every port for every server type application for no reason. the next version would randomly like and dislike hardware. Then i gave Gentoo a shot and i will never move to anything else
  • Blafhert, on 05/13/2008, -2/+5Is anybody seeding i386 torrents?

    I'm getting 12 connected peers and 0kb/s...

    Edit: never mind! 7 kb/s now! ...grmbl
    • Blafhert, on 05/13/2008, -2/+9It took some time, but download rates are OK now.

      Dig me down.
      • MacEnvy, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3Yep, I'm currently reading 728 seeds and 5453 peers. Saturating my download bandwidth, actually. Not too shabby.
  • brettalton, on 05/13/2008, -3/+1Instructions for netinst (network install) still need some help.

    The torrent seems really slow too :(
  • joebaloney, on 05/13/2008, -4/+16Hopefully KDE4 is more usable than in Ubuntu 8.04.
    • Elvaanish, on 05/13/2008, -0/+12KDE 4 wasnt really ment to be your main desktop enviroment, stick with 3.5 til 4.1 comes out. 4.0 is kind of a pseudo beta, so its going to be lacking on any distro.
    • skyshock1, on 05/13/2008, -1/+4KDE 4.0 = busted. Use 3.5.*
    • amirman, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1KDE4 is definitely not a good way to introduce the average user to KDE
  • mojoe176, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5I'm downloading the iso right now. I must say I am very excited to take a crack at the new fedora, i have not used fedora since F5. Should be loads of fun!
  • Demise, on 05/13/2008, -3/+1The torrent is horribly seeded, might want to get a direct download. Dugg.
    • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Yes, initially it is horrible, but after a few hours, you will be amazed the power of Fedora community.
  • Mechanicat, on 05/13/2008, -2/+18Why did they call it sulphur?
  • diggeridooo, on 05/13/2008, -15/+3and still no YouTube out of the box :-(
    • mmcgrath, on 05/13/2008, -1/+6That is on purpose and makes a statement. Perhaps Fedora isn't the right Distro for you or, alternatively, check out some of the 3rd party addons.
      • diggeridooo, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Indeed, I don't like this kind of "statements" that cripple user functionality. Same for mp3. What i NEVER understand: why should it be "legal" to download certain codecs manually and "illegal" if the same thing was done automatically? Why can't mainstream distros just download all the missing crap in the background, without user interactions? Everytime the same fiddling around with Flash and the codecs.
        • init100, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3"What i NEVER understand: why should it be "legal" to download certain codecs manually and "illegal" if the same thing was done automatically?"

          There is no difference in legality. The difference is that if it would be done automatically, Red Hat would carry a legal liability. But since it requires manual setup of third-party repositories, Red Hat is in the clear and the liability is with the user.

          This is primarily because of software patents. Red Hat is based in the US, which has them, and thus must protect itself from liability. Users in the US, and countries with similar laws, can choose to either abstain from getting the legally questionable packages, or commit patent infringement and get them anyway. Users in other countries can legally install those packages and do not have to care about silly US laws.
    • mooninite, on 05/13/2008, -1/+21What??????

      1) Go to adobe.com
      2) Click on Adobe Flash 9 RPM.
      3) Go to youtube.com

      Are you THAT incompetent? You don't get FLASH out of the box with Windows. Good lord.
      • diggeridooo, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Did you acually try to install the Plugin with the Firefox mechanism? It does show the Adobe EULA, but that's it then. Error, nada.
        • jasarien, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1And the solution to that problem is exactly what Mooninite said. Go to the place where you're meant to get Flash from in the first place and stop complaining.
  • Raphyy, on 05/13/2008, -0/+6Can anyone link me to the default fedora 9 wallpaper? It looks so awesome
  • mark076h, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3looks good i may install the new virtualbox and fire this up
    • arcticblue, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Don't use the new vbox if you're on amd64. AMD-V is broken as well as bridged networking (other networking options may be broken as well)
  • nickert0n, on 05/13/2008, -1/+3screen shotz any1s?
  • thecodingstudio, on 05/13/2008, -0/+6Screenshots by TCS
    http://www.thecodingstudio.com/opensource/linux/sc ...
  • crownedgriffin, on 05/13/2008, -0/+7Never fear. My FiOS is now working on the torrent. Upload speeds are already skyrocketing.
  • nylrym, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2PreUpgrade is a great idea and long overdue (you could do something similar by installing the release and release notes rpms and running yum -y upgrade, but it occasionally broke between releases...)
    I will be trying it tonight :)
  • closer9, on 05/13/2008, -0/+11Good luck getting hardware video working properly if you have a Nvidia card. Fedora 9 uses a brand new version of Xorg and Nvidia doesnt have drivers out for it yet.

    To get it kinda working, you need to downgrade your Xorg RPM to the Fedora 8 version.
    • mmcgrath, on 05/13/2008, -0/+18Side note to Nvidia: Thanks for doing a half assed job supporting Linux. You make your money from hardware, not software. Open that crap up!
    • mooninite, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3A nVidia rep stated that they will release a version that works with the beta X.org server, but there has been no mention of an ETA for the actual driver. Hopefully it will surface in a month or two. I'll be on Fedora 8 until then. :(
    • calcium20, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1use the nouveau driver to get your proper resolution for the time being, just no 3d.
    • SpeedSteamBoat, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2I guess I'll just have to let Compiz-Fusion lie for a few weeks. Too bad, I think mmcgrath hit the nail on the head. Why not open up the specs and let the open source community do what it does?
  • potterboy, on 05/13/2008, -4/+5Is KDE4 as awful as it was in Kubuntu 8.04? I liked Fedora 8 but I won't switch from OSX if KDE4 isn't nice and stable with proper plugins installed.
    • rahulsundaram, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2KDE status is reported at

      http://dot.kde.org/1210692815/
    • potterboy, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2I was referring to the implementation, not problems related to KDE4 itself.
    • Buu700, on 05/13/2008, -0/+2KDE 4.1 (the earliest stable release of KDE4) won't be out till July, but even then you might want to wait until a little later to switch over (just to be sure all/most major problems with Distro X and KDE4 are sorted out and all/most early bugs are resolved).
  • nickert0n, on 05/13/2008, -13/+9Well I am an Ubuntu Hardy Heron user and am quite content. I think I would be lost in a distro like Fedora that is RPM based, i need my hand held by Synaptic lol never the less this looks like an improvement from the last couple of messes the fedora has come out with (I havent been happy with it since 2/3) Congrats too all for thier hard work!
    • lynx44, on 05/13/2008, -6/+4Fedora is getting better every release, but the RPM system drives me nuts. Next time I have to do a complete reinstall of the OS I'm just going to try out Ubuntu. If its as good as everyone says it is I think I'd be much happier. I'm tired of fixing dependency issues.
    • mooninite, on 05/13/2008, -1/+17You have no idea what you are talking about.

      Synaptic is a front end to DEB packages. DEB and RPM packages are similar in practice.

      RPM has similar front ends. Yum is one. PackageKit (big feature in F9) is another. The days of "RPM hell" have LONG been over.

      Good lord I hate people.
      • nickert0n, on 05/13/2008, -12/+2Sorry to disturb you, ***** go play dungeons and dragons and ill stick to my Linux for Human Beings TYVERMUCH

        And BTW I know RPM's have front ends, it doesnt make them good.

        That like saying DSL is an alternative to openSuse. Totally un-*****.
        • rahulsundaram, on 05/13/2008, -1/+5Actually Fedora repository has synaptic too. So the frontends can be just the same.

          # yum info synaptic
          Loaded plugins: refresh-packagekit
          Available Packages
          Name : synaptic
          Arch : i386
          Version : 0.57.2
          Release : 16.fc9
          Size : 1.6 M
          Repo : fedora
          Summary : Graphical frontend for APT package manager.
          URL : http://www.nongnu.org/synaptic/
          License : GPLv2+
          Description: Synaptic is a graphical package management program for apt. It
          : provides the same features as the apt-get command line utility with
          : a GUI front-end based on Gtk+


          #
    • ralph123, on 05/13/2008, -0/+19Well, as a fellow ubuntu user I can only say that idiots like you are making me ashamed for using this fine distro.

      Comparing synaptic (which is a graphical frontend to apt) with RPM (which is a package format like deb) is just so incredibly stupid it defies believe.
      • init100, on 05/13/2008, -0/+3Thank you for a reasonable response. It isn't every day that I read comments from Ubuntu users that aren't totally dissing everything else than their beloved Ubuntu. They are usually like "Fedora sucks because it isn't Ubuntu", or "Anyone still uses Fedora? I thought that everyone had moved to Ubuntu. Ubuntu FTW!", not to mention the RPM-related "RPM = dependency hell", or the apples-to-oranges comparison "Synaptic/Apt is much better than RPM".
      • Buu700, on 05/13/2008, -0/+1I also defy believe.
      • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0I have no problem using RPM and YUM all this year, since Fedora 1!
  • l33thao, on 05/13/2008, -12/+0Out of Red Hat'ss oriface comes the sulphur release.
  • joelav22, on 05/13/2008, -1/+9Does anyone know if it FULLY supports wifi (i.e. WEP and WPA without supplicants) out of the box on Atheros wireless chipsets? Ubuntu still sucks at that.
    • lyzz, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5It does have the 2.6.25 kernel which does have the ath5k driver. Try the live cd out; it *should* work.
    • init100, on 05/13/2008, -0/+4Are you saying that wpa_supplicant doesn't count as a full implementation? Why not?
    • nxsty, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Out of the box? That depends on which atheros chipset you have. You might have to compile the latest madwifi sources from CVS if it doesn't work.
  • dafragsta, on 05/13/2008, -13/+2Why the ***** would you ever release a product called "Sulfur?" How ***** stupid is it to name your product after something that smells like *****.
    • king_aaronj, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5who cares? It's just a project name. Why would Microsoft name a project "Longhorn"?
      • dafragsta, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1That was a codename. They never released a product called Longhorn.
  • mGARANDEUR1, on 05/13/2008, -17/+4Yah! Another useless Linux distribution!
  • sixdust, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Where can one find a live distribution of Fedora 9 for the i386 structure?
    • ianweller, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2http://get.fedoraproject.org/ -- under "Fedora Desktop Live Media".
      • sixdust, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1That is the i686 structure and x86_64 structure. My Pentium 4's don't support either.
        • vaporwave, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1I think you are mistaken. If you have a P4, that definitely is not pre-i686. Oh, end even if you had a true i586 (like my VIA Epia) i686 media could me used for that too, it just uses i586 kernel.

          Short: go get the i686 :-)
  • ahmedinejad, on 05/13/2008, -5/+0Earth!
  • fuknlightn, on 05/13/2008, -1/+2Will this one work with my wireless card?
    • ianweller, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1you can always try out the live CD.
  • The3rdjj, on 05/13/2008, -0/+5the direct download is faster then torrent, for me at least.
    • Shootfast, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Yeah but if everyone does that, it rapes the server. If everyone torrents, it's just as quick and saves bandwidth
    • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0It's good for everyone to share some bandwidth together, It benefits the Fedora community, I'm sharing it with maximum upload speed.
  • LegendX, on 05/13/2008, -1/+6hmm Ubuntu or Fedora...which to choose...
    • SDL486, on 05/14/2008, -2/+5Fedora!
    • 4DFX, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7Try both and decide what works best for you.
    • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3I tried both before, I must say that I love Fedora more, just no reason.
  • squeaker, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2WTF? I just upgraded from 8 -> 9, and tried a yum upgrade out of curiosity--and there were already 64 updates available!
    • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1We are living in in the fast world!
      • knopper67, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1And your typing waaaaay too fast...
  • h6LhETnd, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2First!
  • radicalfix, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Fedora users download Fedora 9 using torrent, please seeds!
  • adamgoodfriend, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Has anyone got Nvidia drivers working on this? lack of nvidia support is a big problem for me
    • brisbin33, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1i'm following threads at linuxquestions.org and fedorafuroms.org... hopefully it won't be long, i haven't seen a fix yet though. i'm sticking with 8 until its fully supported
    • radicalfix, on 05/16/2008, -0/+0yum install xorg-x11-drv-nvidia from livna repository
  • grg183, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Fedora 9 rocks ...best release ever!!!
  • mcwest, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1I dont prefer RH based distros somehow but I runned it in vbox and think that fedora improves itself in every next release.
  • billmurrey, on 06/26/2008, -0/+0Yes the fedora 9 release is the best i am so happy with it and i use it for running my servers also and works like i charm thank god for fedora
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.