Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

What's Fedora Up To? Ask the Project Leader

Posted by Roblimo on Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:34 AM
from the not-all-hats-are-red dept.
Fedora Project Leader Max Spevack offered himself up for this interview because, he said, "I look at stories like [your] posting Ubuntu to Bring About Red Hat's Demise and many of the comments about Red Hat and Fedora seem very rooted in the world of several years ago, when the RHEL/Fedora split took place." This is a chance to clear the air, and get an up-to-date look at what Fedora is up to these days. So ask away; we'll send 10 of the highest-moderated questions to Max and (hopefully) publish his answers later this week.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Linux: Ubuntu to Bring About Red Hat's Demise? 435 comments
Tony Mobily has written a thought-provoking editorial for Free Software Magazine that makes the bold prediction of Red Hat's eventual demise at the hands of Mark Shuttleworth and Ubuntu. Calling on memories of Red Hat alienating their desktop user base to focus on their corporate customers and making money, Mobily states that many of those alienated desktop users are also system administrators who now feel more comfortable with Ubuntu and will make the choice to use Ubuntu Server over Red Hat now and in the future.
[+] Fedora Project Leader Max Spevack Responds 135 comments
Max Spevack writes: "Hi everyone. I'm looking forward to answering all of the questions, but before I start diving into that, I guess it would be useful to give a little bit of perspective about me and my role within Fedora and Red Hat, because it will offer some context around the things I have to say."
[+] Linux: Fedora Core 6 Released 230 comments
Shadowman writes "Fedora Core 6 has been released. Recommended download method is via BitTorrent. For more information, see the release notes or the Fedora homepage. Slashdot interviewed the Fedora Project Leader back in August."
[+] Linux: Fedora Core 6 Review 205 comments
luna6 writes to tell us that they have posted a pretty thorough review of Fedora Core 6 with the installation procedure and even a few work arounds for the couple of bugs encountered during the process to help users get up and running smoothly. From the article: "To sum up Fedora Core 6, I will say that once you have it set up properly FC 6 runs very impressively. I had the impression that FC 6 may have been rushed, just because of the handful of minor bugs that appeared. The mixup of arches, i586 & i686 was weird and the first system update having a update conflict was a glaring error, even though it was easy to fix. Setting up the Nvidia drivers was way more problematic than it should have been. I should also note that Mandriva 2007 worked from the start with AIGLX and their 3D drake worked flawlessly. With that stated once the minor problems were fixed, Fedora Core 6 worked as well as any Linux distro I have tried and the visuals were second to none. Well except the default icons...but we have something to look forward to in FC 7 now don't we?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Link? (Score:4, Funny)

    by astralbat (828541) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:37AM (#15859195)
    Did I miss something?
  • Why such a divide? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dsginter (104154) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:40AM (#15859214)
    It seems to me that 'Linux should be Linux'. Rather, we're seeing articles about one linux distro killing another. We never see "Windows Professional is killing Windows Home". IMHO, Ubuntu's success should be a boon for all Linux distros.

    Unfortunately, package management seems to be the great divide. What are you doing to bring One Package Manager to all Linux?
  • Drivers Vs Linux (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Monday August 07 2006, @11:43AM (#15859232) Homepage Journal
    A lot of people I talk to say they don't like Linux due to lack of driver support [wieers.com]. Is there anyway you see this problem being eliminated? How do you court vendors to support their hardware on your flavor of Linux?
    • by jd (1658) <imipak@ya h o o .com> on Monday August 07 2006, @02:02PM (#15860166) Homepage Journal
      ...if it weren't for the fact that there are a VAST number of drivers that are not being included in distros. Madwifi covers a lot of wifi cards, for example. Then, there are drivers for "less common" hardware - WANPIPE is provided by one manufacturer for their T1 cards and there's even patches out there for the LEON architecture, the Texas Instruments OMAP architecture, nanosecond clocks, the VME bus, etc.


      On that basis, I'll ask my question: Users are forever complaining about a lack of drivers, but the drivers they are often presented with are a very small subset of the Open Source drivers that exist. Is this a problem Fedora will be addressing, or will it be largely left to such drivers being absorbed into the mainstream kernel?

  • What's changed? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by KDan (90353) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:44AM (#15859248) Homepage
    You mention that opinions are rooted in the world of 5 years ago. What do you think has changed in the linux world since then, and how does it affect Fedora development?

    Daniel
  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Monday August 07 2006, @11:48AM (#15859269) Homepage Journal
    On the Fedora Project website, there are plenty of reasons listed for Fedora to be your operating system of choice. In your eyes, what is the most lacking aspect of Fedora as it exists today?
  • by tomknight (190939) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:48AM (#15859275) Homepage Journal
    What are you doing this evening? My date stood me up and I'd be a shame to waste a table for two with reservations for this place being the way they are...
  • Vista a Problem? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eldavojohn (898314) * <my/.username@@@gmail.com> on Monday August 07 2006, @11:50AM (#15859288) Homepage Journal
    Do you view Vista as a threat to your user base? Do you or people on your team ever change your mind about things or let looming Vista influence your decisions?

    I'm hoping that Linux distros are not pressured into adding unneeded bells and whistles in a desperate attempt to compete with Vista. Are you invulnerable from this mentality?
  • Linux presence (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OldeTimeGeek (725417) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:51AM (#15859292)
    Linux adoption has been growing, but very slowly. Why do you think that this is the case? What are, in your point of view, the roadblocks to Linux becoming a serious contender for the desktop at home and in the corporate enviroment and how do you plan to address them?
  • by tabdelgawad (590061) on Monday August 07 2006, @11:56AM (#15859320) Homepage
    Do you see Fedora Core as targeted at a particular type of Linux user (developers, server admins, desktop users, multimedia, etc) or are you trying to be all things to all people? Stated another way, what do you see as FC's main (current and future) strengths and weakneses compared to other distros?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 07 2006, @11:57AM (#15859325)
    Have you tried Ubuntu yourself? Is there, in your opinion, something Ubuntu does better than Fedora?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 07 2006, @11:58AM (#15859337)
    If Fedora is actually not controlled by Red Hat anymore, and Fedora is user-oriented, why are both the only general-purpose GNU/Linux distributions that disable the NTFS driver from the Linux kernel?

    Users do need this option (unlike RedHat's customers, which are organizations as far as I know), and for evidence, Linux-NTFS is one of the projects with the most downloads on sourceforge.

    I would like to add that NTFS is part of the mainline kernel. Compiling it as a module will cause it to not take any memory resources other than the few kilobytes on disk that any un-used hardware module is taking, unless of course the user has a mounted NTFS partition.

    RedHat's reason for disabling NTFS support was that RedHat is a US-based organization and that they fear patenting problems from MS. No law action was ever taken, and no actual patent was referenced. As far as I know, NTFS is not even patented or patentable. Fedora is not RedHat as you say, so this old reasoning is not exactly valid for Fedora. The IBM/SCO saga also cleared the issue about patents in the mainline kernel.

    Unless Fedora will change this simple flag in the kernel config file, I assume it is still controlled (and not only sponsered as some would say) by RedHat.
  • Fedora (Score:5, Interesting)

    by modernbob (558981) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:01PM (#15859359) Homepage
    I have been using Fedora since version 2 (or) since support ran out on RH9. It's been getting better with each version and the number of applications there are packages for have increased dramatically. I am using version FC5 now and using it in a production environment on several servers. I continue to read that RH/Fedora doesn't support the idea of using FC for a production environment. Is this true and if so what exactly is FC's charter? I mean what exactly is the purpose of the FC project? What do you envision your users are going to do with FC? Are you thinking about end user at all? Where do you see FC in 5 years? Thanks Robert W. Oldfield
  • Directory Server (Score:5, Interesting)

    by IMightB (533307) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:02PM (#15859365) Journal
    Hi, I've been using Fedora Directory Server for quite a while, and it is a fantastic product. I read some rumours that it would be Integrated with FC5, but sadly it was not. When can we expect this to be a standard feature/integrated with authentication and other areas in Fedora? Thanks, Brian
  • .rpms and the LSB (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MMC Monster (602931) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:09PM (#15859405)
    While the Linux Standard Base advocates the use of .rpm packages, what steps are you using to help other distributions use .rpm packages? What are your thoughts about setting up "universal" repositories that are accessible from different distribution architectures? (A single repo that can be used by suse, redhat, and debian systems). What are you doing to go towards that goal?
  • Dependency hell (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tet (2721) <slashdot@astMENC ... .uk minus author> on Monday August 07 2006, @12:12PM (#15859434) Homepage Journal
    The introduction of yum has vastly improved the user experience when installing software, or updating existing packages. However, it's brought with it a new kind of dependency hell. For example, if I want to install a PostScript previewer:

    % yum install evince
    [...]
    Installing:
    evince x86_64 0.5.1-3 core 773 k
    Installing for dependencies:
    nautilus x86_64 2.14.1-1.fc5.1 updates-released 3.9 M
    nautilus-cd-burner x86_64 2.14.2-1 updates-released 414 k

    That's clearly wrong. I only want to install a PostScript previewer. Doing so should not require a filemanager (which I don't need or want), and certainly not a CD burner. But these are added as dependencies due to the clumsy packaging that seems to be increasingly prevalent in Fedora. Perhaps (and I remain unconvinced) there's some aspect of evince that can make use of nautilus being present. But if so, I haven't seen it. I could well believe that nautilus could make use of evince, but not really the other way around. But assume for the sake of argument that it can use nautilus. That still isn't a reason to have it depend on it. Dependencies should be packages that are required in order for another to run, not packages that will merely enable additional functionality. In this case -- the prime function of evince is to view documents, which isn't significantly enhanced by having a file browser present.

    Fedora is still my distribution of choice, but it's becoming increasingly hard to use for those of us that prefer to run with a minimal system due to the way that the dependencies have been getting out of hand. Are there any plans to fix this, or is any work already underway to do so? I understand that some consideration has been given to providing "soft dependencies" within RPM (like dpkg's suggested dependencies), which would help. Is there a timeframe for this? Is anything else being done?

    I quite understand the focus on getting the system to be usable for the average unskilled user. But the impression I'm getting is that it's being done at the expense of letting those of us that know what we're doing do what we want. Does Fedora have a position on the type of users it's aiming for, or is it still trying to be a general purpose OS?

  • by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:13PM (#15859443)
    What differentiates Fedora from all the other Linux distros? Who's your target demographic?
  • mass end user appeal (Score:4, Interesting)

    by 0xABADC0DA (867955) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:26PM (#15859542)
    I have a suggestion instead. Red Hat should want Fedora to be a runaway hit like Firefox, not just another linux disto. Firefox is a hit because in addition to having features users want, it is easy to install, simple, and cool. My suggestion is for Red Hat to create a distribution that runs easily on Windows. As in click the button and it runs. Here's how you can do it:

    1) A pre-built image file on C:\ that will be the linux hard drive.
    2) A .exe program that loads a windows driver that syncs the disks and replaces the NT kernel with Linux kernel.
    3) When run, this kernel boots off the image on NTFS.

    I know this can be done with existing technology (or at least the hard parts are already working). The NTFS driver can write to an existing file if the size does not change. Linux kernel can init on an already powered up machine and reset the hardware. I know Red Hat does a lot of kernel work and other developement, so I know you guys capable of doing this very quickly.

    This gives the vast majority of users a way to download linux like any other program, run it without rebooting into some scary 'repartition' software, and still get the full benefit and experience of linux. In fact, immediately after downloading they just click the program and say "Yes" to "Shutdown Windows and start Linux?" and 20 seconds later they are in a Fedora core system. If they like it, they can install a normal Fedora directly onto the system. If they don't like it, just delete the image file.

    My question is, will you at least consider doing this? Something like this would be huge for linux adoption and therefore Red Hat mindshare.
  • Goals (Score:5, Insightful)

    by redkazuo (977330) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:30PM (#15859562)
    While Ubuntu has a clear, selfless mission, it seems to me the Fedora project misses this. I'm sure while Fedora was still within Red Hat, its mission was simply commercial. "It must be good so we can make money." That mission no longer applies, and http://fedora.redhat.com/About/ [redhat.com] almost sounds like Fedora is just a rejected part of Red Hat, left Free so that they could attempt to profit from community contributions.

    Is there an objective in the Fedora Project? One that is clear and may motivate developers to join? Or is it here really just to reduce costs for the Red Hat team?
  • by ettlz (639203) on Monday August 07 2006, @12:31PM (#15859566) Homepage Journal
    Fedora has a very strong sense of purity in keeping its distro Free, and I like this (no, I don't mind having to visit Livna for MP3, etc.). Further to the goal of a completely Free system, can we expect to see the Fedora project becoming more vocal about Free drivers, and standing besides our neighbours in the OpenBSD community (amongst others) in pressuring hardware providers for open specifications?
  • RHEL vs RH9 vs FC3-5 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by stry_cat (558859) on Monday August 07 2006, @03:01PM (#15860592) Journal
    What kind of danger do you see in RHEL clones to FC's market? I use RHEL at work and it is by far the best OS I've ever seen. At home I use FC and in spite of your claims it just doesn't measure up. I've started looking into whitebox and CentOS for home use. What are the reasons why I should stay with FC and not switch to a RHEL clone? Also what is being done to make FC more stable, robust, and feature-rich like RHEL?

     
  • Vendor Support (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jarrettwold2002 (601633) on Monday August 07 2006, @03:06PM (#15860626)
    What Linux needs most is hardware vendor support. When are we going to start more weight thrown behind that?

    Ultimately, who has the pull to get it done?