Support LQ: Use code LQ3 and save $3 on Domain Registration
Go Back > Reviews > Distributions > Fedora Project
User Name


Search · Register · Submit New Review · Download your favorite Linux Distributions ·

Fedora Core 2
Reviews Views Date of last review
41 123516 06-20-2005
Recommended By Average Price Average Rating
95% of reviewers $9.36 8.0

Description: This is the second release of Fedora Core by the Fedora Project/RedHat.
Keywords: fedora core two linux project second release redhat

Post A Reply 
Old 05-21-2004, 08:33 AM   #1
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 1, various others
Posts: 26

Rep: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Free. Download options abound. Stable, Latest Kernel (2.6.x), Updated many packages, additional refinements
Cons: Up2date still broken, Missing/outdated packages due to License restrictions/conflicts, minor bugs, lacking plenty of docs for newbies, some config utils need more features

I've been a fan of Fedora Core since version 1. With FC2, stuff just keeps getting better, although there is still plenty of work to be done. If they had a "Heck Yes" option under recommend product, that is what I would have selected. I've have the joy of installing FC2 on three systems since FC2 went gold, and here are my experiences. BTW, the install process was a pure joy. I would say even easier than a normal Windows install.

Well, there are TONS of cool stuff in FC2 like FC1. So, I'll let folks know about that I noticed that was sorta on the negative side. Note, that even though most of this review is about stuff missing, broken, or just out of place -- I mostly LOVED this distribution and version (see rating).

Up2date is still broken -- sorta -- but I don't use up2date anymore since I discovered that yum and apt-get are much better (I prefer apt-get).

I did have problems with an old bug that never got fixed in previous RedHat Linux system -- the 3c59x driver conflict with Kudzu still is there - just disable Kudzu from your run-levels and reboot -- the card works fine after that.

Documentation is sparse at best. I guess folks are still going on the old RedHat 9 docs for now. Your typical man/info pages are there, but you'd expect that much. Just not much in the way of hand-holding docs like RHL series had. They could at least have a "livedocs" type website that is community driven. This is usually not a big deal to the seasoned Linux guru that knows about newsgroups, mailing lists, and forum websites -- but for the newbie, some education is required.

I really like the 2.6.x kernel, I've been waiting since it was released to have it built in to Fedora.

As far as network admin/server admin -- Fedora has all the basic stuff. Although MySQL is still 3.23.x because of license issues. But PostgreSQL 7.4.x is there. There are several packages that are left at an earlier version or removed completely because of licensing issues. In fact, it looks like many of the typical MySQL utils are availabe (unless they are hidden somehow) anymore. Remember Pico? Same license type issue.

As far as security goes, default install is fairly secure. The system-config-security-level lets you easily configure iptables with broad categories: www, mail, ssh, etc. and does allow for extra ports, but that's it. No configuring of limits, where to redirect logs, or other advanced stuff. For the ultra security freak, SELinux is THERE but is it disabled by default because it is sorta a pain to work with. If you know that the heck you are doing, just enable it and have fun. Also, Bind is setup by default in a chroot (jail) environment. You might have to regen your RSA key for rndc if you change your host name. I do like the way they setup loading the IPTABLEs config as if it were a service (technically it is builtin to the kernel) -- when you "stop" iptables, they just load the "let-everything-through" config and when you "start" it, they load the normal config (edited through system-config-security-level script).

Personally, I completely understand and support the CYA policy of Fedora and RedHat about keeping out unfriendly licenses. At least, make it easy for folks to "screw the lic. issues, I want my MP3s". But I'm sure even doing something like that would raise legal problems. However, from a newbie point of view, they won't care WHY stuff was left out or WHY packages are woefully outdated -- they just want it all out of box and to work without extra steps involved. This is especially true for the newly converted Windows users. I'm not sure how we can address the license issue -- provide an extra "bonus" CD? A paid, licensed version of Fedora with properly licensed packages (that will wouldn't work for MySQL)? I'm not sure, but I do know that many users simply don't care WHY they did something if another distribution includes it.

In all, FC2 looks deceptively newbie friendly. But with stuff missing that most folks would assume would be there would make this distribution not the best introduction to Linux (or would it). Lack of browser plugins, no mp3 support out of box, confusing menu items, and lack of newbie friendly docs will not be good show for those trying to migrate away from their Windows systems. Again, just a fact of life at this point.

I think it would do them good to completely ditch up2date. It takes less effort to install, configure, and run apt-get than it does to get up2date working properly. The default update tool should be apt-get or at least yum.

Well, the majority of this review is negative, but I would still give FC2 a 7 to 9 out of 10 (depending on point-of-view):
Newbie rating: 7/10
Server admin: 9/10
General hobbyest: 9/10
Security Freak: 8/10 (SELinux sort hard to work with, disabled by default).
Network/Sys Admin: 8/10
Old 05-23-2004, 02:22 PM   #2
Registered: Dec 1969
Posts: 0

Rep: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8


Compared to Windows, the O/S installation, hardware detection, and network configuration were very easy to perform. I've been a Windows user since 3.1, and recently converted to Fedora Core 2, and I am really impressed with its ease of use and stylish interface.

Installation couldn't have been any easier: pop in the CD, follow the on-screen prompts, and Linux is installed. My only gripe with installing Linux, is that it required more space than my Windows installation, but then again Linux is more secure and more stable than Windows, so I'm willing to sacrifice HDD space for security and reliability.

Fedora's hardware detection is excellent. I installed it on my old Gateway G6-400, and everything was detected, right down to my USB CD-RW drive. Unlike Windows, I wasn't required to load various disks for hardware drivers as everything is supported with this distribution. My only gripe in terms of hardware compatibility under Linux is that I cannot burn discs using my USB burner. Then again, I am new to Linux and there's probably something out there for me to compile in order to burn to a USB device.

In my opinion, Fedora's interface under GNOME is easier to navigate and more simplified than Windows. My mother is able to get online and do her thing without a problem, under Windows she didn't know where to go and what to do, provided of course that Windows didn't crash. What really impressed me about the interface is how it resembles Windows XP in certain aspects. It brings a touch of style to this beat-up Gateway, without the sluggish performance and security risks of XP.

Now on to what I don't like about Linux:

For the first few days I ran Fedora Core 2, I didn't know to install/compile downloaded programs. After doing some research online, I now have a basic knowledge on how to install applications. WIth Windows, I enjoyed being able to download the executable or compressed file, doing the double-click and everything was installed. But after reflecting on Linux software installation, I now feel that the Linux method of installing applications-download source code and then compile under the root account-prevents other members of this household from downloading and running spyware, trojans and other malicious applications. If they want something installed, they have to ask me as I have the administrator privileges on this box. No one messes with my box!

Another problem I have with Linux is shutting down my system. When I choose the shutdown command from the log off menu, Linux is closed, but the PC simply reboots as opposed to powering off. It's not a huge problem, but it's just an annoyance that I could do without. As of this post, I am still researching how I can fix this situation.

And my final beef with Linux is the load time, from turning the computer on until the login screen loads. Compared to Windows it does run a little slower, but then again my machine is only a PII 400 MHz with 128 MB SDRAM, and I believe this distribution calls for at least 192 MB of RAM in order to use the graphical interface to its fullest.

If anyone were to approach about an alternative O/S to Windows, I would tell them to go online, download and install Fedora Core. Out of the Linux distrubitions I've tested, Fedora is simply the easiest to setup and use. I tried Mandrake for a few hours, but it ran so slowly on my machine that it wasn't worth keeping on my HDD. Althought it did properly shut down my machine, which is a huge plus.
Old 06-05-2004, 12:27 PM   #3
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 24

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0


About the shutdown problem, try typing these commands as root:
#shutdown -h now
#init 0

I prefer init 0, that works all the time

Old 06-06-2004, 04:05 AM   #4
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 91

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Stable, new kernel, newer drivers
Cons: can't use nvida drivers with default kernel, other minor bugs, easy installation

Everything installs easily. In my experience, my hardware was detected and proper drivers were loaded for it. Although my video card was detected the only driver I can use is the nv driver (the driver does not support 3d acceleration). The official Nvidia drivers (which do) do not work. apparently there is a problem with the way the Fedora core 2's kernel is compiled. However this can be fixed by installing a new Kernel. There are also little bugs that get annoying. up2date crashes a lot, there may be problems installing wine, and some user have problems dual booting it with windows xp.
Old 06-06-2004, 09:11 PM   #5
Hell Cheese
Registered: Jan 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 2
Posts: 12

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Slick Installation UI, Easy to use and set up, Fixes what I couldn't with Redhat 9
Cons: Doesn't recognize my video card (ATI Radeon 9600 SE), XMMS licence problems (same with RH9), no auto-install RPM thingy program

The installation UI is top notch. Unlike Slackware (which I installed today to attempt to get my video card working), FC2 has a 1337 installation program, picks up my network easily, and is pretty easy on the eyes.

KDE 3.2.2 is nice (my copy of RH9 wouldn't allow me to update it), and it's always helpful when I need it.

Up2date was a bitch in RH9. It's been fixed in FC2 apparently, and it works pretty well.

XMMS still has the screen telling you that you can't play mp3 files, but that can be resolved through reinstalling.

My major gripe with FC2 is the RPM system. In RH9, I could double click on an RPM, enter my root password, and if I had the dependencies, install it with no problem. While going into bash and installing is not such a problem, I just like it the other way.

Overall, great product.
Old 06-09-2004, 12:44 PM   #6
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core
Posts: 9

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Easy to install and configure, Tons of great open source packages!
Cons: Still difficult to install new software at times

For a fresh installation, FC2 has pretty much everything you'd expect from a modern OS. Including all the most popular applications FC2 has something for everything, including: Gaim (chatting), Gimp (image editing), OpenOffice (Word/excel stuff), Quanta (HTML/Web editing), etc. This installation was smooth and all my hardware drivers were automatically configured correctly.

A couple of packages that weren't up to par are (1) XMMS and a functional (2) web browser.

I was pretty experienced with making XMMS work with Redhat 9, but if you haven't done it before it may be a little bit tricky to actually get XMMS to play MP3s. For this I recommend:

As far as a web browser, the included Mozilla 1.6 and Konquerer just don't cut it so I went to Firefox.

An issue I've had with FC2, has been copying large file from CD-ROMs to the hard drive. This is not a hardware issue, nor is it related to speed at which the discs were written at (my CD-RW only writes at a maximum of 4x). For more detail see my post:

Overall, for a free OS, I couldn't ask for much more from FC2.

System Specs:
2.0 GHz Intel Celeron
Supermicro P4SPE motherboard
ATI Radeon 7500 graphics card
2x 256MB DDR400
1x 120GB HDD
Iomega CD-RW and/or Standard Sony DVD-ROM
Onboard sound
Onboard ethernet
Old 06-11-2004, 10:00 PM   #7
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch Linux 0.7
Posts: 52

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Free, bluecurve is nice, lots of apps
Cons: No video player(by default), download is almost always a requirement, no mp3

I've used a lot of linux distributions including Slackware, Redhat, SuSE, Ark, Lindows, and Fedora, but Fedora tops the list as most comprehensve with the best base price (NOTHING, WOOHOO). I started out with Redhat about three years ago and was impressed with Bluecurve, it wasn't Windows, but it was clean, effective, and well laid out. I then tried SuSE because of all the wonderful reviews, UGH, it's terrible, it's so cluttered and GASP, I never liked YaST. Everything else had nothing equivalent of Bluecurve, so when I heard about Fedora, I just climbed aboard. I had heard it wasn't meant for the average user, but after Slackware, I was ready for anything. Fedora blew my mind, making it's mark in my mind even greater than in Redhat. I loved it's departure from the KDE and it's focus on it's own brand of Gnome, just like Redhat, and I loved the package manager that was so clean and well laid-out. It was just as beautiful as SuSE but it was as tweakable as Slackware.

But even the best is not perfect, I had to get Xine, because of the copyright issues, as well as the xmms mp3 plugin. But had most of these in store when I needed them, so it was almost as painless as a commercial distribution(xine took a little coerction. And contrary to the Lindows and Ark style of, "you get what we give you", I was allowed to install things such as the kernel source right from the disk(a real timesaver). Plus Fedora is packed with the latest software with all the variety you could ask for.

If only Fedora had a commercial version with xine and mp3 support built in, but it was fine. Plus, unlike the new SuSE, there was no forty dollar price tag. This distribution made me rethink my opinion that linux was a little bit too stuck on either side of the arena, user friendliness, and customizeability(that's a really long word). Overall, I found it a refreshing retake on a great original, namely linux.
Old 06-12-2004, 10:14 PM   #8
Registered: Oct 2003
Distribution: Fedora, RHEL 5
Posts: 220

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Latest Gnome and KDE packages, 2.6 kernel, Package Management, Ease of Use, Packed with features, very intuitive.
Cons: Needs more (or actual working) GUI based config programs

FC2 is a spectacular release. I think the project has come around very well. FC2 contains a lot of new stuff and still keeps that Red Hat flavor that people have come to love. I personally only had a few problems but they were not FC related they were more 2.6 Kernel related. All the issues that I experienced are being experienced on all distro's with 2.6 kernel.

With that said I have not had a problem with FC2. There are a lot of nice and smart folks out there who are using it so it is nice to be able to have a plethora of expertise just a web site away, if need be.

I would recommend FC2 to the advanced and to the noobs! Windows watch out! Linux just got easier!

Old 06-14-2004, 05:34 AM   #9
Registered: Feb 2004
Posts: 89

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Fast, free, stable
Cons: Default kernel doesn't support nvidia drivers

This product is perfect except for the lack of nvidia driver support at present, but nvidia is working to fix this problem. In fact because this distribution forced me into a kernel compile to get 3d acceleration working i have to thank FC2 for teaching me more about linux. Gnome loads in 2 seconds flat on my new kernel. Clean install worked fine first time dual booting with Windoze XP. Everything was auto-detected, which is what I have come to expect from Red Hat. It also has the slimline look and feel.

This distribution is fast, stable and free as linux should be. It would truly be 10/10 without the nvidia problem. I recommend this to anyone, from n00bs to more experienced users.

NOTE- I only needed discs 1-2 to install default workstation install + qt development packages to make xconfig the kernel.
Old 06-16-2004, 01:17 AM   #10
Registered: Dec 1969
Posts: 0

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 9

Pros: Ease of setup, solid, great included applications
Cons: No built-in mp3 capability, NVIDIA drivers don't work (I don't care whose fault it is)

Setup utility was a breeze, and the big applications that came with it work great:, Evolution, and Mozilla. I love the new GNOME, and the "yum" update software works perfectly. Yum allowed me to go right out and download an mp3 plug-in for XMMS, something that should have been included anyway. The nVidia drivers don't work either, which pisses me off. No Unreal Tournament 2004, until nVidia releases new drivers for Fedora's 4k stack (or whatever). Being a relative newbie, I'm not inclined to recompile my own kernel.
Other than the nVidia crap, Fedora Core 2 works like a charm. I did replace Mozilla with Firefox, but not because of a problem with Mozilla.
Old 06-22-2004, 11:44 AM   #11
Registered: Sep 2003
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 74

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: OpenOffice 1.1.1
Cons: No ISA sound card support, lack of documation, lack of linuxconfig (or somthing like it)

I'm a little anoyed that my ISA Creative VIBRAC16 (Plug 'N Pray) sound card does not work.

Also, nether sendmail or postfix is working.
Old 06-26-2004, 07:41 AM   #12
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Slackware 10.1
Posts: 8

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 7

Pros: Good for n00bs. Auto Hardware detect. Free. Only needs a little tweaking
Cons: no option to set KDE as default. Nautilus. GRUB auto loads an older kernel. a bunch of ISOs

I have had a little experience with Linux before, mainly RH9. It didnt really offer me anything that Windoze couldnt offer so I switched back. After a while I decided to give Linux a try again. I waited for FC2 to come out because there was only a week to go.

FC2 needs a lot of ISOs compared to Slackware or some of the other distros. You could probably get away with only cds 1-3 but when I later wanted to install KDE and some other thing because it didnt install them by default (for a workstation) it had me doing musical chairs with the cds!

One thing that really bugs me is that there is no way to set KDE as the default gui instead of GNOME. For all you who like GNOME this may not be a problem but for those who prefer KDE it is. For one in the "Open file..." box there is no way to manually enter a path! You have to click on all of those little icons. Two, GNOME only has 2 backgrounds, the default one and no background. This may seem trivial but some people like their comp to have an eye candy factor.

Another thing is I used up2date (its always worked for me) to update things and among them was the kernel. The default kernel is 2.6.4-1. It updated it to 2.6.6-1 but kept 2.6.4 on the system. GRUB, however, always wants to load up 2.6.4! You have to hit the up arrow and select the 2.6.6 kernel!

Also be aware that as of now there is no official FC2 version of Wine. There is a edited version made to work with FC2 available from fresh RPMs and some other sites. There are also commercial versions such as WineX if you have the $$$.

Another problem Im having is that my soundcard doesnt work. Its probably something with the Linux kernel and not FC2.

Now that Ive got all the bad stuff out of the way I go on with the good stuff.

Its good for n00bs. It doesnt scare you with the Terminal right away. It has many gui tools that can do almost all of the things you can do with the Terminal. You need to use the Terminal if you want to install an RPM youve d/l'd.

Another thing I really like about RH9 and also with FC2 is auto-detect. It detects your hardware during install. No further setup required! (except if you have an nVidia grfx card)

In summary, its a good OS for people who have little or no Linux experience but want to gain the skills needed for Slackware, Gentoo, or LFS. Its developed by the community and the Red Hat staff so its trustworthy. Best of all its FREE unlike SuSE, Mandrake, or Linspire!
Old 07-10-2004, 08:55 PM   #13
Flak Pyro
Registered: Jul 2003
Distribution: Fedora Core 5
Posts: 126

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: APt-RPM, Lots of packages, stable, fairly up to date
Cons: Sound card detection, bit of a learning curve for new linux users

This newest release from the Fedora project has its ups and downs, to start with the people at Red Hat have written some handy little GUI utilities for some of the most common admin tasks, this is very handy and accessible for new users. RPM is called evil by some and good by others, well with fedora i don't usually download RPM packages on their own, i use APT-GET which makes installing software a breeze, multimedia is a little weak to start with but by using APT and YUM this can be fixed rather quickly. With a fresh install Fedora lacks Flash, Java, Mp3 and alot of movie file type support, but by setting up apt from and using freshrpms as a repositority, you can quickly grab, Xine, MP3 support, and Flash support.

My Biggest problem with this distro was that my sound card would not work, i tried to get it to work for days, but i ended up swapping a more common type of sound card into the box, upon rebooting was greeted with sound when i logged in. Kppp did not work for me at first, i had to edit my resolv.conf and set my DNS info, that wasn't hard to fix. Some people complain about the new version of Gnome, but if you dont like the new way it opens folders this can quickly be fixed in Gconf, either that or just use KDE. I have used Red hat 8, MDK 9.1, 9.2,PC LinuxOS and Vector Linux, and this is the best distro that i have run into thus far, granted i am new user but this is the first distro i have actually gotten real work done on. As for the Hard drive issues, using google you can find out how to pass the kernel your hard drive geometry during install, this prevented FC2 from frying my windows partition.
Old 07-22-2004, 02:08 PM   #14
Registered: Jul 2004
Distribution: Fedora
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros: It runes more stabel and are more secure than Windows
Cons: Some problems with my GLX ( games like UT 2004 for linux )

I just installed Fedora Core 2 on my system for about two mounts ago and was suprised over the user friendlynes in the install program. It was like installing windows. In fact it was almoust easyer to install the fedora core. And i was suprised that the plug and play utillity worked. It found all my hardware stuff and did not act like the windows plug and pray utility :) wich has devolupt to plug and play over the years ;)

As newbie The Fedora Project gave me a good innpresion whith its user frienlynes. I have some propblem with installing some apz and running games (that should have linux support)

The game problem i have is to run Unreal Turnament 2004. Cant find GLX. I`m running a Nvidia GF 4 TI4200 and i have tried to download a driver for linux and installed it. But still get the same message when i trie to start it.
Maybe someone can help me?
Old 08-01-2004, 04:10 PM   #15
Registered: Jul 2004
Distribution: Gentoo (not ricer Gentoo)
Posts: 165

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: D/L | Rating: 8

Pros: Nice GUI, easy to use
Cons: modified packages, bad package manager

If you have no desire to really learn linux, no desire to experiment with your computer, then try fedora. It is pretty stable, has a lot of good gui and with a properly setup system, I would feel comfortable giving it to my parents 9all they do is surf the web, check e-mail and use Office).

The 2.6x kernel is much faster is FC2 than it was in FC1.

The annoyance's are in the fact that it is based on RPM so there isn't really a package manager (think add or remove programs) that encompassessoftware compiled from source.

FC modifies packages so if I have issues, the software sites instructions don't always work. In a sense I always have to seek out Fedora specific help files.

Bottom line: It is stable as long as it does what it wants and it gets RPMs specifically designed for it. It hides alot of what is under the hood and I would recommend it only to people who don;'t care how everything works and for newbies who are just trying to get acquantinted with what Linux has to offer. (Though Knoppix might be a better choice for that)
Page:  1 · 2 · 3 More Items


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:15 AM.

Main Menu

Write for LQ is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration