[HN Gopher] Fedora 35
___________________________________________________________________
Fedora 35
Author : 9front
Score : 199 points
Date : 2021-11-02 15:35 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (getfedora.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (getfedora.org)
| elric wrote:
| I'm somewhat confused by the "Power Modes" feature ... it's being
| introduced as a Gnome feature, but why would that be tied to
| Gnome? Isn't it usable from other window managers/desktop
| environments?
| rwmj wrote:
| This defaults to Pipewire (instead of PulseAudio) and some are
| reporting problems with audio, especially in browser-based
| conferencing applications like Google Meet. I have Fedora 35 and
| don't use GMeet, but can report that playing videos (vlc) is
| fine.
|
| Edit: See reply about the Pipewire default. However people
| reporting problems with audio in browser conferencing systems is
| new in F35.
| ollien wrote:
| Wasn't Pipewire the default as of 34?
| paol wrote:
| Yes it was.
|
| It broke passthrough audio because Pipewire doesn't have that
| feature yet, so I had to downgrade all the way to ALSA to fix
| my media center which I have Fedora on.
| throwaway20371 wrote:
| Is Apple still the only company you can pay for both hardware and
| software support? Because all I want is to drop down a couple
| grand and never have to think about "computer maintenance" again.
| I maintain my car myself because it's so infrequent (pretty much
| just oil changes) but it feels like my computer maintenance is
| constant.
|
| One of the reasons for that constant maintenance seems to be The
| Web. Remember when you didn't need 4 gigs of ram to browse the
| web? When you didn't need a high-power 3D graphics card to look
| at Google Maps? (bad example but WebGL is mandatory for some
| simple sites, and if your graphics sucks/doesn't do hardware
| acceleration...)
|
| I don't remember ever having to upgrade my car every few years
| just to visit a new local business. At some point we need to
| admit that this constant tech churn isn't improving our lives,
| but it is enriching some billionaires.
| c7DJTLrn wrote:
| I completely get what you mean. I love freedom, I love being
| able to tinker, but these days I just want my machine to work.
| Linux on laptops is a nightmare, often even on the hardware
| that "supports" it. MacBooks are good enough that I can get
| things done and I don't have to think about Wi-Fi drivers or
| GPU drivers or whether I'm using the wrong CPU governor causing
| it to pump out heat. So I bought one and so far I haven't
| looked back.
| tosihakkeri wrote:
| > Linux on laptops is a nightmare, often even on the hardware
| that "supports" it.
|
| That's just not true. Try a ThinkPad with Fedora and you'll
| see.
| andyp-kw wrote:
| What kind of maintenance are you doing on your machine?
|
| I restart my work and home machines once per month for updates
| and that's it.
| throwaway20371 wrote:
| Why do your machines need monthly updates? Do you constantly
| update any other machine that you own? Lawnmower, car, oven,
| microwave, bicycle, watch, reciprocating saw, vaccum, garage
| door, TV?
| m45t3r wrote:
| Apple machines still needs constantly updates, and worse,
| they keep nagging you.
|
| My only macOS installation is a Catalina one, and Apple
| keeps wanting me to upgrade it to Big Sur, that I don't
| want for some reasons. However, the only workaround I found
| to stop the update badge from appearing (that is really
| distracting since it confuses me if this is something
| important or not) is to set some strange flag and kill
| Finder. If I open settings for any reason, the update badge
| reappears and this is really infuriating.
|
| My system with the last amount of maintenance is my NixOS
| installation, where any workaround that I need for
| software/hardware issues are forever described in my
| dotfiles. So yeah, I need to find how to fix something
| once, however afterwards it will just work. Also different
| from Apple I can do upgrades when I want, they're atomic
| and I can also do rollbacks, so they're pretty much safe
| from a user perspective.
| mickotron wrote:
| Mitigation against security vulnerabilities? Bug fixes? New
| features?
|
| This question is intentionally missing the point.
|
| If you think an internet-connected computer used for modern
| workloads can be treated like a lawn mower and doesn't need
| any updates over its usable life, you're dreaming.
| Daegalus wrote:
| Because software is buggy, even Apples. It's not like you
| are updating hardware (like your other examples) you are
| doing a software update so that the software interfaces
| with the hardware better or fixes bugs.
|
| nowadays your TV if it's a smart tv also gets monthly or
| quarterly updates too. they just tend to happen in off-peak
| hours. and car software updates are when you take them in
| for service.
|
| you aren't doing a fair comparison asking why your X
| hardware doesn't need updates when comparing mostly
| hardware with simple software and full operating systems.
| throwaway20371 wrote:
| How is it not a fair comparison? They're machines. Just
| because we are currently building them in a way that is
| incredibly fragile and needs constant fixes, does not
| mean they _have_ to be built that way.
|
| Cars used to be built by hand, had tons of bugs, and were
| expensive. Then a man came along and found a way to
| produce them faster, cheaper, and with less bugs. That
| was pretty amazing for a time, but they still had plenty
| of bugs. And then some people from a culture of very
| fastidious craftsmen obsessed with quality began
| producing cars a little cheaper, and with far fewer bugs,
| and they lasted much longer. Then the whole world
| realized, "shit, our machines don't actually need to be
| so fragile," and they followed suit.
|
| The lessons learned by those people in that culture were
| promoted around the world, and evolved to shape what we
| now call Lean and Agile. But the people using these new
| processes forgot the first lesson: we don't have to
| accept the status quo.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Macs are neither cheaper nor less buggy, so I think I
| have to agree with the other guy. You're comparing Apples
| to oranges.
| mickotron wrote:
| Where there is software, there are bugs.
|
| It's not defeatist, it's reality.
|
| You can test, but testing does not prove an absence of
| bugs. It just means your tests did not reveal any. Maybe
| your testing is flawed, incomplete, inappropriate, biased
| etc.
|
| Just saying for devs to "not write bugs" is pretty naive.
| Almost like saying "don't have car accidents". We don't
| want to have them, yet here we are. In complex
| environments, things happens that are sometimes outside
| our immediate control.
| throwaway20371 wrote:
| So then shouldn't we stop writing software? If it's
| really impossible to make software that doesn't have tons
| of bugs, yet it's perfectly possible to make hardware
| without those bugs, shouldn't we be "making hardware"
| instead?
|
| Actually, now that I think of it, that's not the problem.
| The problem is we keep _changing_ the software. My laptop
| from 15 years ago still functions exactly the same way it
| used to. It hasn 't disintegrated into a puddle of bits.
| You just can't use it to visit any "modern website" or
| run any "modern software". If we just stopped upgrading
| everything every 5 seconds we could keep using old
| technology.
| wooque wrote:
| What's advantage of Fedora over something like Arch?
| shams93 wrote:
| It depends upon what kind of work you do, like if you do music
| with Bitwig anything but Ubuntu is going to be a nightmare.
| dyingkneepad wrote:
| I think a big advantage of Fedora (also Ubuntu) is that a lot
| of its maintainers are being paid by Red Hat to maintain it. A
| lot of times your bug reports are going to be quickly read, you
| know it's very likely there is someone who is getting paid to
| ensure whatever problems you may have, don't happen. I know a
| lot of other distros have this too, but Red Hat employs _a lot_
| of Fedora maintainers.
|
| OTOH, you're kinda subject to Red Hat's will. But then, every
| project is subject to its controllers. It's not like the Debian
| people are doing a good job just because they're not subject to
| a for-profit company.
|
| Personally, I am very thankful for fact that the Fedora project
| is often the first to adopt certain technologies and inflict in
| their users the pain of fixing the first bugs and stabilizing
| the technology. Then a few years later I get it in Debian and
| it works just fine.
| tapoxi wrote:
| You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade
| experience. It is not rolling.
|
| Compared to Ubuntu, more stuff is upstreamed and the package
| management is nicer (dnf history undo is a lifesaver).
| dralley wrote:
| You get _upgrades_ every 6 months, but updates are rolled out
| constantly. For example Fedora gets the very newest kernels
| at the same pace as something like Arch, even for older
| releases. Fedora 33 currently has the same kernel as Fedora
| 35.
|
| I would consider it "semi-rolling". It has major releases,
| and a few packages are pinned for the duration of the
| release, core stuff like glibc, systemd, GNOME, compilers /
| toolchains for various languages and so on. But the rest of
| the system is kept very up to date.
| mroche wrote:
| > You get updates every 6 months with a really nice upgrade
| experience. It is not rolling.
|
| Also worth noting that these updates are _optional_. A given
| release has a ~13 months of support:
|
| ---
|
| _We say maintained for approximately 13 months because the
| supported period for releases is dependent on the date the
| release under development goes final. As a result, Release X
| is supported until one month (4 weeks) after the release of
| Release X+2.
|
| This translates into: - Fedora 34 will be
| maintained until four weeks after the release of Fedora 36.
| - Fedora 35 will be maintained until four weeks after the
| release of Fedora 37.
|
| _
|
| https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Mai.
| ..
| schmorptron wrote:
| Easy installation, tested packages, a lot of proprietary
| software comes as rpms but not arch packages
| kunagi7 wrote:
| First of all, I used to be a Fedora user. The experience most
| of the time was excellent. Updating was a breeze and via
| external repos most packages were readily available. Most
| desktops/spins are well supported like sway, i3, xfce.
|
| Nowadays I use Arch which I also think it's a great distro. The
| only thing I miss are delta RPMs.
|
| Also, since CentOS was shut down, Fedora is a good way to learn
| how Red Hat based distros internals work.
| dralley wrote:
| > The only thing I miss are delta RPMs.
|
| Delta RPMs just aren't worth the pain. They were a nice idea
| at the time but the utility of them has not kept up with the
| cost of supporting them.
| silverfox17 wrote:
| CentOS wasn't "shut down"... it's still out there, just as
| CentOS Stream now. The changes for most users are minimal to
| not even noticeable.
| smarx007 wrote:
| And there is Rocky Linux for the rest.
| ollien wrote:
| I've heard great things about Alma
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| CentOS most certainly was shut down, and replaced with
| CentOS Stream, which is a _similar_ product that went from
| at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI breakage, to
| the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI breakage. Close
| enough for many uses, but not the same thing.
| mroche wrote:
| > went from at least as stable as RHEL and not having ABI
| breakage, to the beta for the next RHEL and having ABI
| breakage.
|
| Please review the following resources before making
| statements about RHEL ABI compatibility in Stream:
|
| ---
|
| RHEL ABI: https://access.redhat.com/articles/rhel8-abi-
| compatibility
|
| RHEL Kernel ABI:
| https://access.redhat.com/solutions/444773
|
| Kernel Sources (Module.kabi_<arch>): -
| RHEL 9: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-
| stream/rpms/kernel - RHEL 8:
| https://git.centos.org/rpms/kernel/blob/c8s/f/SOURCES
|
| Pat Riehecky - Thinking About Binary Compatibility and
| CentOS Stream:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVZuvoVau-0
|
| ---
|
| As a future version of RHEL, CentOS Stream is bound by
| the RHEL Application Compatibility Guidelines and kABI
| stablelist. I'll say it again:
|
| _CentOS Stream is bound by the RHEL Application
| Compatibility Guidelines and kABI stablelist._
|
| All packages that exist in Stream repos have passed the
| same internal gating test suites that RHEL has.
|
| I'm sorry if this comes off as rough but it is very
| annoying seeing this "ABI incompatibility" statement be
| thrown around constantly without people fully
| understanding what it actually means in the context of
| RHEL. It is _not_ an all-encompassing policy that applies
| to the every part of the distribution the same like it
| would be implied for a library strictly following semver.
| There are levels and nuance, and some packages don't even
| make the list (which is why there are packages without a
| -devel subpackage).
|
| It is okay to say that Stream may not be bug-for-bug
| identical to released versions of RHEL, but it will be
| ABI compatible.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| I was thinking specifically in the context of ZFS, which
| break on minor releases because kernel-internal symbols
| are not fully stable (unless I've seriously misunderstood
| https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/11320). And since
| Stream is a rolling release, users will therefore
| experience breakage unless they specifically pin their
| kernel version (or possibly use DKMS). That's ABI
| breakage, and RH explicitly saying that it doesn't count
| doesn't stop it breaking stuff that would work in a non-
| rolling release.
| mroche wrote:
| Again, please review the Kernel ABI knowledge base
| resource I provided, specifically the last two bullet
| points in the article.
|
| If OpenZFS happens to work throughout an entire RHEL
| minor release and they are using non-kABI symbols (which
| they are), that is not ABI compatibility: that's _luck_.
| It is in no-way-shape-or-form any kind of ABI
| compatibility the way it is defined for RHEL. You can't
| call RHEL kABI/ABI compatibility something it's not, it
| has an explicit meaning and definition.
|
| Per the GH issue you provided the project explicitly
| stated they did their best to reduce as much as possible
| their reliance on non-kABI symbols. This was accomplished
| through symbols being added to the RHEL stablelist and
| OpenZFS reducing the symbols they actually use. If they
| didn't have to use non-kABI symbols there wouldn't be a
| problem. I've had NVIDIA kmod's from ELRepo fail
| _multiple_ times in a single minor release because non-
| kABI symbols changed, not to mention between minor
| releases. This is still not an example of RHEL kABI/ABI
| breakage.
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| CentOS Linux is end of life at the end of this year, so in
| that respect, it was shut down: https://www.centos.org/cl-
| vs-cs/
|
| CentOS Stream isn't geared towards production environments
| according to the CentOS website.
| smarx007 wrote:
| Recent software just as in Arch while not fearing to upgrade
| and being unable to boot because you didn't read "edit this
| config" notice?
| Iolaum wrote:
| Not specifically about Fedora but Fedora Silverblue for me:
|
| The key value for me is, if an update breaks something, I
| immediately roll back to the previous image (with just 1
| terminal command) and don't have to deal with it unless I
| actually want to do so.
| ranger207 wrote:
| Fedora is Red Hat's "flagship" distro, in the sense that it's
| where all the cool new changes debut. Since Red Hat's pretty
| involved in core Linux development, Fedora is often one of the
| first places you can get major changes without having to set it
| up yourself. Like Pipewire for example: it's been available on
| Arch and Fedora for a while now but Fedora's the first place
| you can use it without having to set it up yourself afaik.
| ayushnix wrote:
| You get SELinux by default if you care about security although
| it's kinda esoteric and hard to understand.
|
| You get to work on a potentially Red Hat Enterprise Linux like
| distro. Might come in handy professionally.
|
| Hmm, can't think of anything else. I use Arch.
| zhengyi13 wrote:
| > SELinux [is] kinda esoteric and hard to understand
|
| I don't totally disagree with you, but a thought suddenly
| struck me: maybe, exactly like Git, it _isn 't_ hard to
| understand, it's just that the UI, UX, and attendant
| documentation are not written for the majority of their
| potential audience. And thus, in the same way that many
| people fix Git problems by simply blowing away their local
| repo and starting over, SELinux users simply `setenforce 0`
| and walk away.
| underscore_ku wrote:
| meh, Ubuntu is better
| _benj wrote:
| Fedora is my goto distro when I need to get stuff done. I've used
| it professionally and it has worked just fine with all the
| proprietary software I needed (jetbrains, zoom, slack, spotify,
| etc...)
|
| Although Arch has a special place in my heart and I play from
| time to time with FreeBSD, Fedora pretty much just works out of
| the box, is very stable (in my experience), has decently newish
| software (even if it is from flathub...) and it's not to hard to
| find rpms around for more obscure software.
|
| The only issue that I've come across is with older software...
| Fedora doesn't seems to care that much about backwards
| compatibility so if I need to run a software with old ncurses
| version, tough luck.
| awwwwaawa wrote:
| Archlinux doesn't even support Secure Boot. Fedora does, and so
| does Ubuntu, it is much more pleasant this way when dual-booting
| with Win10 or Win11.
|
| Fedora does have a VK_ERROR_INITIALIZATION_FAILED Vulkan problem
| with Nvidia though that Arch does not. F34 or F35 can't launch
| Wolftestein Youngblood from Steam on X11 session and errors out
| with VK_ERROR_INITIALIZATION_FAILED. Same system works on
| Archlinux and can even launch Youngblood in Wayland session.
|
| Under Fedora I notice the following things:
|
| - in wayland session vulkaninfo fails to run unless
| WAYLAND_DISPLAY is unset like so: WAYLAND_DISPLAY= vulkaninfo
|
| - on Fedora with X11 session vulkaninfo randomly toggles between
| Mesa's software lavapipe vulkan and nvidia's vulkan
| implementation
|
| - steam fails to launch a Proton game (Wolfenstein Youngblood) on
| X11/Wayland with "Startup failure:
| VK_ERROR_INITIALIZATION_FAILED" message
|
| - I hear you need to set Vulkan variable: export
| VK_ICD_FILENAMES=/usr/share/vulkan/icd.d/nvidia_icd.json before
| running 'steam', I tried and it fixes running 'vulkaninfo' so
| lavapipe doesn't randomly activate but it had no effect on steam,
| still getting VK_ERROR_INITIALIZATION_FAILED
|
| Vulkan on Fedora is absolute shit show.
| ancode wrote:
| It is so hard to tell people about using Linux, how great it is,
| it's free, etc, and then you get to the name part and it's called
| 'fedora'.
| butz wrote:
| As a non native English speaker I still cannot understand what
| is wrong with name "Fedora"?
| handrous wrote:
| > I still cannot understand what is wrong with name "Fedora"?
|
| Nothing whatsoever to 95+% of people, but perhaps 5%, most of
| whom one might describe as "very online", have decided to
| strongly associate it with a certain type of annoying guy
| prone to wearing them (they're more often trilbies, but
| whatever, the fedora is what's been "meme'd"), to the point
| that they would choose to be bothered or turned off by an OS
| named after the hat style.
| phkahler wrote:
| Tell them you use Fedora-Linux.
| ajusa wrote:
| I've been using Linux on a secondary machine since 2011, and as
| my daily driver since 2018. I've distrohopped quite a bit -
| Ubuntu (2011), Puppy Linux (2012), Manjaro (2013), LXLE (2014),
| Solus (2016), and then back to Manjaro (2018). I liked Manjaro
| because I could get newer packages in the repositories (when
| compared with Ubuntu) and because of access to the AUR.
|
| I made the switch to Fedora 34 a few months ago from Manjaro. It
| has newer packages than Ubuntu, has more software than Solus, is
| more modern than LXLE/Puppy Linux, and is more stable than
| Manjaro in my experience. I got tired of running `pacman -Syu`,
| rebooting, and having my machine not turn on due to some new
| kernel change or some video driver change, or something else. I
| _never_ had a smooth update with Manjaro, which led to me
| delaying updates for months until I would have time to debug and
| fix my laptop after the update. Bit of a security issue,
| especially with how often browsers update.
|
| Fedora has been rock solid, and I haven't had any issues with my
| machine crashing or not booting into a desktop environment after
| an update. Congratulations to the team, looking forward to
| (smoothly) updating my laptop today!
| xfalcox wrote:
| > having my machine not turn on due to some new kernel change
| or some video driver change
|
| Let me guess, Nvidia?
| ajusa wrote:
| Nope, Ryzen 3500u with integrated graphics :)
|
| There were quite a few issues with amdgpu that would get
| fixed in certain kernel/video driver updates, and broken in
| other ones.
| nix23 wrote:
| Always use the Original not Manjaro but Arch, not Ubuntu but
| Debian etc.
| shaan7 wrote:
| Ah well, Manjaro was a blessing for me, so much that I
| donated to them as well. It feels like the best of both
| worlds - I don't have the motivation to install the system
| from scratch, but I'd like to use AUR.
|
| Oh, and as others have said, upgrades are quite a YMMV thing,
| Manjaro upgrades haven't broken things for me since the last
| few years.
| nix23 wrote:
| >I don't have the motivation to install the system from
| scratch,
|
| Archinstall is a thing now.
| [deleted]
| alvarlagerlof wrote:
| No way
| aufhebung wrote:
| Why? Is there a reason behind this principle or is it just
| dogma?
| nix23 wrote:
| Just my personal experience since ~2000
| mekster wrote:
| Try to explain?
| nix23 wrote:
| Well it's a bit a mix of predictability and stability
| (not the technical one).
|
| One example Ubuntu...first Unity then Amazon then Snaps,
| and ubuntu is even considered an "enterprise distro"
|
| But i am really not a distro fanboy (super happy if one
| uses linux and not windows/mac), in fact i use Free-BSD
| (no truenas etc...again same rule, take the original (i
| know technically that would be netbsd)) wherever i can,
| and if i have/can touch linux i choose a old warhorse-
| distro, mostly because of future
| predictability/stability.
| sandGorgon wrote:
| agreed Fedora is spectacular. Rock solid. Everything works. It
| has all the components tightly integrated.
|
| > _Nvidia's proprietary driver now includes massively enhanced
| support for Wayland thanks to tight collaboration between the
| Fedora, Red Hat, and Nvidia teams._
|
| No surprises there - Fedora sponsors most of the devs for the
| kernel as well as components like PipeWire, etc
|
| Gnome is beautiful. I have had people carrying Macs ask me what
| OS im running - on my cool looking carbon fiber white Lenovo
| Yoga.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> Gnome is beautiful.
|
| I've been using Fedora since 2005 and the one thing I _don
| 't_ like is the gnome desktop. I run a 55" 4K screen and
| spread out my windows like work on a real desktop. If I want
| to start something I have to move the mouse 5 miles to the
| upper-left corner (where there is no visible cue) to get the
| launcher-bar to appear. And then the bad appears, but all my
| windows magically rearrange and shrink, and the launcher now
| appears at the bottom of the screen, so I have to move my
| mouse 7 miles down to start something. I'd love to have the
| launcher ever-present and optionally on the left, right or
| bottom. But as people say, the gnome developers "know what's
| best for people" and do it how they see fit.
|
| Most everything else about gnome is OK, and Fedora in general
| is great IMHO.
| cuu508 wrote:
| You can get the launcher/overview by pressing the Win key,
| no need to touch the mouse.
| phkahler wrote:
| I don't want the overview. I know someone spent a lot of
| time on it and is probably proud (as they should be) of
| their dynamic ordering of the windows so you can see them
| all, but I don't want that view. Also, like I said I want
| the launcher available all the time - I've got tons of
| space for it and don't want to have an extra step to get
| it. I also don't have a Win key - maybe it's disguised.
| kaba0 wrote:
| But I have never ever did this use case. I generally do
| Super + typing the program I want, or some version of the
| above.
| opencl wrote:
| You can install an extension (i.e. dash to dock) to make
| the launcher ever-present on whichever side of the screen
| you want. The main downside is that the extensions always
| break on GNOME upgrades and take a little while to get
| fixed.
| em500 wrote:
| > I got tired of running `pacman -Syu`, rebooting, and having
| my machine not turn on due to some new kernel change or some
| video driver change, or something else.
|
| I did get an update that disabled the trackpad on my Asus
| laptop around Fedora 32 or so. It was an upstream kernel bug
| that got fixed in a few days, but it was still pretty annoying.
| This was during a regular dnf update within the same major
| version, not an update from 32->33 (the kernel gets updated
| regularly, not just between Fedora version updates).
|
| So personal anecdotes and YMMV.
| ajusa wrote:
| The really nice thing about `dnf` is that you can easily
| downgrade or rollback an update. There's also an easy way to
| see all of the packages that have been installed by the user
| to help track down when or what broke a system (which I
| haven't had to use yet, but it is nice to have).
| [deleted]
| howeyc wrote:
| > because of access to the AUR
|
| to those that switch away from Arch, what do you do about this?
| stop using that software? update/build it yourself from source?
| EarthIsHome wrote:
| I switched from Arch to Fedora in 2015. I don't miss anything
| from AUR. When I was on Arch, I used a bunch of stuff from
| AUR, but I honestly can't remember what I used.
|
| So, it seems like it's worked out okay. I honestly got tired
| of using Arch and configuring everything. Things would break,
| and I'd have to figure out how to fix it. What broke the
| camel's back was when my window manager, awesome, broke.
| Don't get me started on the name 'awesome' for a window
| manager and how difficult it was to search for solutions to
| problems. By that time, I had grown older, and I just wanted
| something to work, and Fedora works fine for me.
| Darmody wrote:
| I only used Arch (and AUR) to play around. I've been using
| Ubuntu and Pop as my main OS for years. I've never felt like
| I needed something from AUR.
|
| I don't need the last software update right away and if I
| need it, I have PPA and flatpak.
| pizza234 wrote:
| > I liked Manjaro because I could get newer packages in the
| repositories (when compared with Ubuntu) and because of access
| to the AUR.
|
| > I made the switch to Fedora 34 a few months ago from Manjaro.
| It has newer packages than Ubuntu
|
| It's interesting to compare the release policies of the those
| distros.
|
| Manjaro is a rolling distro; Fedora releases every 6 months,
| with 1 year support; Ubuntu has a mixed model (LTS: release
| every 2 years, support 4+ years, non-LTS: 6 months
| release/support).
|
| Technically speaking, Ubuntu can have more up to date packages,
| if one goes the non-LTS way (I personally don't suggest that,
| though).
|
| With the LTS versions, there's also the alternative of using
| official PPAs, repositories and self-contained package
| managers.
|
| I do upgrade every two years (and I even find it too frequent)
| and use official PPAs/repos, but 1 year sounds appealing for
| users wishing out of the box recent packages, without using a
| rolling release.
| fstrthnscnd wrote:
| > I got tired of running `pacman -Syu`, rebooting, and having
| my machine not turn on due to some new kernel change or some
| video driver change, or something else.
|
| It never happened to me with Manjaro.
| loudmax wrote:
| I'm a little surprised. I've been running Arch since 2011 and
| it's been rock stable for me. I've run Fedora on secondary
| machines, but I never stuck with it because things would break
| during updates.
|
| I suspect hardware has a lot to do with it. My Arch laptop is a
| ThinkPad with Intel graphics, and my secondary machines have
| been whatever is around.
|
| The other variable is the desktop environment. On my primary
| laptop I used to run LXDE, and then switched to i3, and now
| sway. I ran ALSA instead of Pulse, but now I'm dipping my toes
| into PipeWire. When trying out Fedora I would always try Xfce
| which seemed like a good compromise since Gnome is definitely
| not for me. Xfce may not be much of a target for Fedora
| developers though, so it may not get the amount of attention
| that Gnome or KDE would get.
| grawp wrote:
| My experience with Arch from 2015 to 2018 was too rock solid
| on Thinkpad. (I gave up on Arch for completely different
| reasons than stability.)
| alimbada wrote:
| > _having my machine not turn on due to some new kernel change
| or some video driver change, or something else. I never had a
| smooth update with Manjaro_
|
| Ironically, this was my experience of Fedora 10+ years ago when
| I dabbled with Linux as a desktop OS. I especially remember
| spending hours on IRC talking to Fedora folks trying to debug
| audio issues. I think it was around the time they transitioned
| from ALSA to PulseAudio.
| cevn wrote:
| On the flip side, I've been using Manjaro for years without
| issue, but when I updated my Fedora 33 workstation to 34, KDE
| showed a black screen oh boot. No matter how hard I tried I was
| unable to solve this problem, so I will be skipping Fedora from
| now on..
| prophesi wrote:
| Do you use an Nvidia GPU? I think nouveau had issues with KDE
| Plasma on Fedora 34. Though I believe you could still boot,
| it would just hang while logging in. I had to install
| nvidia's proprietary drivers to fix it, though eventually
| switched to Gnome and haven't had any issues.
| cevn wrote:
| It's an AMD GPU. Maybe I'll try updating it to 35 just for
| the hell of it, even though I'm sure it won't have an
| effect...
| pizza234 wrote:
| Sadly, I couldn't make Nouveau work neither for recent
| cards (20x0) nor for old ones (7x0). I hated Nvidia; now
| I'm a happy AMD user :)
| prophesi wrote:
| Yep, I'll be making the switch to AMD once my machine
| could use an upgrade. :/ Props to the nouveau team, but
| AMD is so much more linux-friendly.
| ajusa wrote:
| Yup, folks have different experiences a lot of the time when
| it comes to distros. I'm not claiming Fedora is always more
| stable than Manjaro - just that it has been for me.
| cevn wrote:
| I remember at the time of setting it up Fedora was the
| logical choice because they had some of the first support
| for AMD new graphics card (RX5700?). It was quite stable on
| my other computer and I recommended it for a while.
| adar wrote:
| 100% in agreement with you. I liked the idea of Manjaro but the
| way they deployed Nvidia driver updates made it feel like
| absolute luck of the draw whether you'd have a login screen
| waiting for you after rebooting post-update. I've had more
| Nvidia driver issues on Manjaro in a year than I've had in the
| past decade+ on Ubuntu or any other distro.
|
| Switched to Fedora a week ago which I like a lot so far, but I
| still very much miss the AUR.
| ajusa wrote:
| Flatpak + user maintained copr's have been mostly able to
| fill that void for me. The only package I've had to compile
| so far (that would have been available in the AUR) is wrk, a
| HTTP benchmarking tool. There is a copr available for it, but
| it doesn't seem to have builds for Fedora 34/35.
| mekster wrote:
| Why not use Homebrew? wrk seems to exist.
|
| And it can work across any Linux distribution.
| marcodiego wrote:
| The difference between mainstream distros is shrinking. Soon,
| the most popular ones will come with pipewire, wayland and a
| recent GNOME with few modifications by default.
|
| Thanks to flatpaks, appimages and snaps, I can finally have
| recently released software with a very stable distro. Hand
| compiled sofware often goes to /usr/local by default and I can
| install it without breaking anything. If I want bleeding edge
| without compiling it myself, I can still resort to guix, nix or
| homebrew.
|
| The "native package manager" is not something we have to
| interact with so often these days. Linux on desktop has had
| some interesting improvements lately and the thing that was
| pointed by many as its biggest problem - fragmentation - is a
| much smaller issue now.
| shaan7 wrote:
| > The "native package manager" is not something we have to
| interact with so often these days
|
| I guess one of the awesome things about Linux is how it
| manages to keep a wide variety of people happy. For example,
| one of the reasons I like to use Linux is I want to update
| everything at one go, and the fact that I have a Software
| Center app that lets me do exactly that - is awesome!
|
| On another note, I hope Flatpaks keep gaining more popularity
| among the three. I really like using Flatpaks more than
| Snap/AppImages.
| update wrote:
| I'm in a similar situation. Distro hopped quite a bit,
| (OpenSUSE, Ubuntu, Debian).
|
| For 5 years now, I've ran Fedora on an old laptop that resides
| at my parents house, 5000 KM away from me. In that time I have
| not once physically been in contact with that server. I've done
| all updates via ssh, including full system upgrades (e.g.
| Fedora 32 -> Fedora 33) without any hiccups.
|
| To me, that's amazing.
| sho_hn wrote:
| I've upgraded the Fedora install on my laptop continuously
| through Fedora 19 -> 33 without reinstalling now. That's
| about 8 1/2 years. Not bad at all.
| bachmeier wrote:
| Has Fedora fixed its package management? I eventually deleted my
| Fedora partition and installed Ubuntu because package management
| was so painfully slow.
| washadjeffmad wrote:
| It seems you're being downvoted for a not very contentious
| experience.
|
| Running "dnf install $pkg" can take upwards of a minute (~40
| seconds with default repos for me) while it invokes "dnf
| update". This can make the act of browsing through and
| installing lots of packages one by one take many times as long
| as using apt's cached lists.
|
| It's the only part of dnf I'm less than enamored by.
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| The 'dnf update'* part only runs sometimes, depending on your
| cache expiry setting in dnf.conf. If you run a single-package
| 'dnf install' a bunch of times in the same hour or two, then
| only the first one is slow while it runs the 'dnf update'*
| process.
|
| _Actually it just updates the metadata - it won 't install
| new versions of packages. It is like the apt-get update, but
| if you actually run 'dnf update' that's equivalent to apt's
| update _and* upgrade.
| bubblethink wrote:
| dnf tab completion is horribly slow on both RHEL and Fedora. I
| don't know why this is still a thing, but it has been always
| bad since the yum days in RHEL 5 or 6.
| smarx007 wrote:
| DNF is actually faster for me than APT on Ubuntu. 700 packages
| can get updated on 100Mbps link in a few minutes. Large package
| updates took 5+ minutes on Ubuntu.
| severino wrote:
| I haven't used Fedora since 2015 or so, but at the time, I
| always felt DNF to be very slow or heavyweight. For example,
| I remember installing one random small package with few or no
| dependency installs at all could take something between 30
| seconds and more than one minute, while apt-get would usually
| install the thing in a breeze. I wonder if this has changed.
| smarx007 wrote:
| Ah, but 'dnf install' does also what 'apt-get update' does
| when necessary. So, dnf is faster for me than 'apt-get
| update && apt-get install'. I think there is a flag you can
| alias to force disable updating repos. Though the delay is
| rare for me.
| mroche wrote:
| The flag you're thinking of is '-C | --cacheonly'. It is
| very useful for doing stuff like 'dnf
| [search|rq|list|etc...]', but it is not allowed with
| upgrade/install type runs.
|
| dnf will do a check when running subcommands like
| 'install' to see if it _needs_ to update the cache data
| (as you noted), it won't always do it. There are a few
| factors that play in, but you can also adjust the cache
| expiry time in dnf.conf.
| vondur wrote:
| I believe some of the default settings for DNF are to
| blame. Editing the dnf.conf file to allow for more
| simultaneous downloads and selecting the closest mirrors
| can really speed it up.
| curt15 wrote:
| That's because dnf metadata is massive compared to apt's.
| If you're installing something on Fedora for the first
| time, dnf needs to download about 100mb of metadata.
| tapoxi wrote:
| Since 2015 they've been moving logic over to libdnf, which
| is written in C instead of Python.
| dralley wrote:
| It has improved a lot in the last few years, but a few things
| to point out:
|
| * It's slower partly due to the sheer quantity of metadata.
| This metadata can be quite useful sometimes but whether it's
| worth the price can be debated.
|
| * It's slower partly because DNF is transactional and is
| keeping track of the changes made to your system. This allows
| you to do things like view the history of your actions,
| rollback entire package operations, roll back every operation
| since $date, and so on. And also it can tell you whether any
| given package was installed directly by the user, installed as
| a dependency for something else, which repository it came from
| or whether it was installed directly from a file, and so on.
| All of that is super useful for auditing and recovering from
| screw-ups, but it means the package manager is doing a lot more
| work.
|
| * The default # of parallel package downloads is a little low.
| It gets a lot faster if you bump it up a bit.
| blinkingled wrote:
| As a GNOME/Wayland based desktop Fedora 35 is a definite
| improvement - it looks decent, Firefox looks and performs great
| with proper Wayland/EGL integration out of the box.
|
| I found the height of the Gnome Top Bar or window title bar are
| way too big for a laptop screen and I could not find a way to
| change those (used to be done with CSS but that's gone looks
| like) - best I could do was to switch to different themes and
| autohide top bar with an extension. Hacky but at least makes it
| usable.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| I don't know if it's still maintained, but the Minwaita theme
| (found on the usual theme websites) is just a fork of the
| default Adwaita theme that has less padding, especially in the
| top bar and the title bars.
| blinkingled wrote:
| Yeah Minwaita still seems to work - not eye candy but does
| the job. The Flat remix set of themes have borderless
| variants that don't give you any vertical space back but at
| least make it visually less bothersome to look at the title
| bars.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Yeah, that's one of the few minor GNOME gripes that I have.
| That top bar is thicc
| nickhalfasleep wrote:
| I have this on a Microsoft Surface Laptop Go, and all the
| hardware "just works" right after install. Video, external video,
| touchscreen, sound, networking.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I'm a huge fan of Arch. Not only can you quickly search for
| packages, but the packages are actually maintained and kept up-
| to-date. With Arch, not only is the software usually up-to-
| date... even if it isn't, it is easy to modify a PKGBUILD file--
| but they actually provide a package search on their website.
|
| Even Ubuntu and Debian allows you to search packages on their
| website, but not Fedora. With Arch, when you search for a
| package, you can immediately see how the package is built as
| well.
|
| Yes, Arch is not a distro for people that just want to run Linux
| with a bunch of out of date software. It is for people that want
| to take some building blocks and create the perfect distro for
| them. Unfortunately, the choices can be confusing at times, but
| it has been well worth the effort on my part to find out what
| software works for me. Once you do that, just keep a list of the
| packages you install. If you need to reinstall, it is easy enough
| providing that package list to pacstrap.
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| You can search for a package on Fedora's website. Very similar
| to Debian. Just do a Google/DDG/etc search for "Fedora
| packages" and click the link. (src.fedoraprojecr.org)
| razze wrote:
| Fedora is usually up to date. In my experience more then
| manjaro (but that's not arch), still usually fast enough.
| mickotron wrote:
| If Fedora was rolling release, it would be a candidate for my
| daily driver.
| harel wrote:
| I've been using Ubuntu since 2005. Most of this time on
| Thinkpads. My last laptop is the 9th gen X1, and the microphone
| does not work on the latest Ubuntu (not LTS, but still a very
| basic function). On a whim I tried a live Fedora On Fedora it
| just worked. This makes me wonder if it's time to change distro
| after so many years. I always kept to Ubuntu as a switch would
| slow me down while I learn where everything is but it seems like
| that barrier is lower these days....
| hackerbrother wrote:
| Just switched to Fedora because Microsoft declared my CPU
| incompatible with Windows 11. Works great! Cinnamon is a
| wonderful desktop manager too.
| criddell wrote:
| Just out of curiosity, what did Windows 10 not support that
| Fedora and Windows 11 does?
| kronk wrote:
| Most likely his processor. That's what's holding me back on a
| 2 year old i7.
| criddell wrote:
| So both Windows 11 and Fedora are significantly better than
| Windows 10 in CPU utilization for you?
| razze wrote:
| Not sure you read the initial post the correct way :)
| criddell wrote:
| Then clue me in. A Windows 10 user wants or needs some
| functionality in Windows 11 but their machine isn't
| compatible. Instead, they switch to Fedora.
|
| Doesn't that imply Windows 11 and Fedora have some
| required feature that Windows 10 lacks?
| samus wrote:
| Windows 11 has the _anti_ -feature of not supporting the
| old processor anymore. Who knows why. Could be anything
| from simplifying QA and maintenance effort to not being
| able to (or not willing to) implement a feature on the
| older platform.
|
| Compared to that, I don't know of a platform Fedora has
| recently deprecated. Linux usually takes a really long
| time to deprecate and remove support for old hardware.
| handrous wrote:
| criddell is wondering what thing in common Fedora _and_
| Win11 had that made switching to either of them
| preferable to just sticking with Win10, I believe. As in:
| why not just stay on Win10, unless it was lacking
| something that Win11 and--apparently, if it was a viable
| alternative--Fedora have? What was the thing they both
| had that Win10 did not?
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| I assumed they wanted their OS to keep getting updates
| and new features.
| criddell wrote:
| handrous explained my question exactly right.
|
| Windows 10 is still supported until 2025 and nobody would
| be surprised if they extend it two more years. If I were
| setting up a new machine today, I would probably still
| install Windows 10. Anything new is an unknown from a
| security perspective.
| marcodiego wrote:
| Debian 11, Fedora 35... These two distros are very influential.
| Both were recently released and both come by default with
| pipewire and wayland.
|
| We'll have an Ubuntu LTS next year and it will probably be
| influenced by these releases. A few new problems because of these
| changes... a lot of fixes because of these changes.
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| Pipewire and wayland are not the default on Debian 11. You can
| use wayland on debian 11 fine, but pipewire is still not
| officially supported (https://wiki.debian.org/PipeWire).
| kairo wrote:
| While Pipewire is not default, Wayland absolutely is and has
| been the defalt on distros defaulting to GNOME for a very
| long time, unless the distro patched gnome to not do so (like
| debian did with Stretch)
| smarx007 wrote:
| Waiting until screen sharing works under wayland in FF, Chrome
| etc. Quite a smooth ride otherwise.
| vetinari wrote:
| This has been working for months (but behind flag in Chrome);
| what's your problem with that?
| smarx007 wrote:
| Not knowing about the flag :)
| vetinari wrote:
| Found the Chrome user :)
|
| chrome://flags/#enable-webrtc-pipewire-capturer
| razze wrote:
| Just use Firefox then :)
| dtx1 wrote:
| Please share the flags and necessary services!
| vetinari wrote:
| In Fedora and with standard desktop spins, it should work
| out of the box by default, in Firefox.
|
| For Chrome, you need to enable chrome://flags/#enable-
| webrtc-pipewire-capturer
|
| For more details, what packages need to be installed and
| what setup done (for sway, for example) see https://wiki.
| archlinux.org/title/PipeWire#WebRTC_screen_shar... (yes,
| arch wiki, the principles are same for all distros).
| commoner wrote:
| Release notes: https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-35/
|
| See also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29081329
| Aisen8010 wrote:
| Thanks for sharing the noteworthy changes.
|
| I'm not a fan of Fedora, I had a bad experience(many bugs) in
| the past. Nevertheless, it's a good distro to check out the
| newest Gnome.
| mroche wrote:
| Depending on how far in the past your experience came from,
| it may be worth mucking around on a spare machine if you have
| one from time to time. I transitioned from EL8 to F34 earlier
| this year (moved to F35 this past weekend) and for my use
| cases it's been wonderfully solid.
| esarbe wrote:
| What was the last version you tried?
|
| I've been using Fedora for years and years now and it has
| never disappointed me. Rock solid.
| suvo wrote:
| Fedora used to be on the bleeding edge ages ago.... For
| anybody who abandoned it after FC8, I'd say you can
| definitely give it another shot. A lot has changed in the
| past decade. I run it even in my production servers (yeah, I
| know RHEL is there but I don't want to pay for subscription)
| alongside Debian and it has never crashed on me.
| ufo wrote:
| Fedora Magazine has more info on what are the new features in
| this release:
|
| https://fedoramagazine.org/whats-new-fedora-35-workstation/
|
| And also about the differend spins that are available for
| download.
|
| https://fedoramagazine.org/announcing-fedora-35/
| jcastro wrote:
| Fedora Silverblue in particular has changed my workflow, but I
| came from Ubuntu and I felt like I was lost in an entirely new
| world so some friends of mine helped me cobble together a set of
| scripts.
|
| So if you come from Ubuntu and want to give Fedora a shot but you
| need Ubuntu images, versions, etc then this might help you!
|
| https://github.com/castrojo/ublue
| jtdev wrote:
| Serious question: why move to Fedora if you need all of this
| from Ubuntu? Why not just stay with Ubuntu?
| mistrial9 wrote:
| because your employer signed a security agreement that
| specifies RedHat?
| jcastro wrote:
| I want the advantages of using an image based OS, if you go
| look in the Ubuntu 21.10 thread here on HN from that day
| there's a bunch of complaints about PPAs breaking updates,
| etc. and Silverblue fixes all this.
|
| EDIT: I did a stream last night trying to explain this to a
| coworker if you feel like listen to me ramble, sorry about
| the audio we just decided to do it on the spot:
| https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1193532435?t=00h22m23s
|
| Hopefully someone else can explain better than me!
| [deleted]
| heresie-dabord wrote:
| https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-silverblue/
|
| "Fedora Silverblue is an immutable desktop operating system.
| It aims to be extremely stable and reliable. It also aims to
| be an excellent platform for developers and for those using
| container-focused workflows."
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| Do Ubuntu toolboxes exist for Silverblue yet or is still just
| Fedora?
| fstrthnscnd wrote:
| The main advantage of Silverblue isn't just toolbox (which
| isn't originally an Ubuntu tool, btw).
|
| The main advantage of Silverblue is its _readonly root fs_.
| Toolbox comes as the provided way for devs to be able to work
| on top of that feature.
|
| I think Debian has/had some energy devoted to turn the root
| fs read-only as an option (perhaps in order to move to an
| ostree based distro, ostree being already available as a
| package in Sid). Hopefully they'll manage to get it working.
|
| Also, please note that it's not a silver bullet. An immutable
| FS is a good feature for security (both from malicious
| adversaries and an oblivious self), but _of course_ it 's not
| enough.
| thebeardisred wrote:
| If by "toolboxes" you mean the original "CoreOS Toolbox"
| (https://github.com/coreos/toolbox) which was originally a
| bash script, now re-written in Go
| (https://github.com/containers/toolbox) that's very, very
| unfortunate.
|
| It _should_ just be a user configuration.
|
| In the original we defaulted to the latest Fedora image (yes,
| even in the days of CoreOS... blame me for that), but allowed
| the user to override this with an environment variable (and
| later a `.toolboxrc` file in their home directory). Thus,
| IMHO, this is a regression. Now it seems the
| new stewards are trying to be "clever" and protect you from
| yourself, creating "foot-guns" in the process.
|
| According to the docs
| (https://github.com/containers/toolbox#image-requirements):
| Since Toolbox only works with OCI images that fulfill certain
| requirements, it will refuse images that aren't tagged with
| com.github.containers.toolbox="true" and
| com.github.debarshiray.toolbox="true" labels. These labels
| are meant to be used by the maintainer of the image to
| indicate that they have read this document and tested that
| the image works with Toolbox. You can use the following
| snippet in a Dockerfile for this: LABEL
| com.github.containers.toolbox="true"
|
| edit: I forgot part of my point: This is a regression from
| the original utility.
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| > This is a regression from the original utility.
|
| Oh...well that's unfortunate.
| jcastro wrote:
| Not yet, however people have been PRing in Ubuntu images, I
| just snagged them even though they're not merged.
|
| I link to some build scripts people use in my repo, but yeah
| it would be nice if there were more distros in toolbox so
| that people can use whatever they want.
| geewee wrote:
| And here I am still on Fedora 33 because all of the GNOME addons
| I use still don't work with anything newer than that.
| xook wrote:
| If I may ask, why not switch to another distro? Are those
| particular add-ons useful, or is it inertia?
| harel wrote:
| Is there a "translation" guide for distro hoppers? Something that
| I can tell which distro I'm coming from and it would tell me to
| do X in distro Y, do Z?
| nix23 wrote:
| Don't hop take a old warhorse distro and your good:
|
| Arch OpenSUSE Debian Fedora
| ruined wrote:
| installer still doesn't support root on zfs, i guess. there's a
| "guide" on openzfs wiki but it only provides a suggested
| partition schema
|
| ubuntu at least had a gui tool available in their last LTS,
| though it only worked for the gnome frontend.
|
| nvme fronting a raid is really nice but btrfs and lvm/mdadm
| options just fall short with write holes and other unacceptable
| failure modes.
|
| kind of a shame because dnf is so much better than apt, and i'd
| like to play with silverblue.
| intsunny wrote:
| Given the licensing of ZFS, and the friendly nature of Oracle,
| I suspect Fedora/Redhat/IBM et al will never ship with native
| ZFS support.
|
| This strict adherence to licensing matters certainly saved
| IBM's ass in SCO v. IBM in regards to IBM's work on JFS for
| Linux.
| ubercow13 wrote:
| Well yeah, Fedora doesn't support zfs at all.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-02 23:02 UTC)