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

Notices

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

Fedora Core 5
Reviews Views Date of last review
46 214483 03-15-2010
spacer
Recommended By Average Price Average Rating
76% of reviewers None indicated 7.3



Description: The bleeding edge of devel, but nearly useless on the Hobbyist desktop. Not for production!!!
A 5 disk monster of bloat that is not for those that desire a nimble and stable OS. Do NOT attempt to load this with a non-Ext2 or 3 version linux or bsd dual booted, or even with dual harddrives. Will not upgrade from FC4, nor from RHEL4.2.
Extreme difficulty or impossible to shoehorn in rpms that are not directly FC origin, seg faults or just outright freeze of the PUP (updater) is chronic.
Strictly a bleeding-edge hacker's toy, not for the faint of heart or those that desire reliability or smoothness of packaging. It's like FC1 all over again. Only bigger.
My shot: wait and see, for now. FC6 could be awsome!
Keywords: fedora core 5 redhat bordeaux


Author
Post A Reply 
Old 04-09-2006, 10:39 AM   #1
parthab
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Very cutting edge, user friendly
Cons: Some things don't work for a good reason :)



I have installation notes and review at my site.
www.partha.com
 
Old 04-09-2006, 01:58 PM   #2
Mizzou_Engineer
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Distribution: Gentoo 2007.0 x86 & amd64
Posts: 25

Rep: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Stable, reasonably fast.
Cons: Slow install, monitor resolution issues, seems half-done.


I installed Fedora Core 5 on a new computer that is sitting in a lab. There are other computers there that run RH9 and FC4, so I put FC5 on this one as it is newer.

The install was quite slow and there were very few options in the install when using GUI mode. This would be good for new-to-Linux users, but a little dumbed-down for advanced users. Once installed, the OS runs nicely on the dual-2.8 Xeon box and seems about as stable as any other decent Linux I've used, which means that it is like a rock.

It looks and feels much like FC4 but with kind of a halfway-done feel to it. The configuration tools work decently but it seems like they do not really mesh together well, like say, SuSE's YaST does. I also could not get KDE to run the monitor at its full 1600x1200 (it said 1152x964) even though the X configurator said it was 1600x1200 and it was 1600x1200 during the install. The refresh rate is also unable to be changed

All in all, it's decent but looks like it would have benefitted from a little more polish. The goods are there, but they just need a little more tweaking and this will be a very good distribution.
 
Old 04-13-2006, 02:38 PM   #3
karellen
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: Ubuntu Edgy Eft
Posts: 10

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: stable, fast, safe, cutting edge, mixed user-friendliness with advanced tools
Cons: resource hungry, bulky


Together with Suse 10.0 that's my favourite distro
 
Old 04-16-2006, 03:53 PM   #4
beast2k
 
Registered: Jul 2004
Distribution: Slackware 13
Posts: 15

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 4

Pros: Cutting edge, great looking,
Cons: Cutting edge, basic hardware detected but not working, multimedia support nonexistant as usuall, Way to bloated, resource hog


The problems start before the install even begins, the cd checking utility that verifies that your cd's are okay is not working correctly so it will tell you that cd's are no good when in actuality they are fine. So after needlessly burning a few extra cd's I start the install which goes okay it's your typical anaconda installer with a different "bubble" theme. After install I start the usuall multimedia setup that is still required with fedora all went okay there, I tried installing crossoveroffice 5 it installs fine but refuses to install any software I used this app on fc4 with no troubles. I tried to install my firefox bookmarks from a floppy and lo and behold the floppy drive is detected but refuses to work, but thats okay I said I also put my boomarks on my zip disk so I put in my zip100 disk and that does not work either at this point I'm thinking "does the cdrom work? I tried it and it did work with no problems (small miracle there)Fedora5 uses a new way to mount media called gnome-mount (I think thats what it's called) I would guess thats why all removable media doesn't work. Getting connected to my network and internet went smoothly enough though. Over all I would say it just isn't ready for a new linux user if you have been using linux for a while and know how and have time to fix these things then fedora may be for you but with other distros offering full MP3 and multimedia support and built in ATI/nvidia drivers working out of the box along with working floppy and zip support and doing all of it with one cd not 5 or 6 it is getting harder and harder to justify the time spent on fedoras multimedia setup and to repair buggy drive support. In my opinion you would be better off using suse or mandriva fedora is just not ready for use there is just to many things to setup and fix it not worth the time or the headaches. Fedora Core 5 the begining of the end for fedora ? They really blew it with this one.
 
Old 04-21-2006, 11:09 PM   #5
jnev
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 158

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 3

Pros: looks nice
Cons: VERY unstable


last time I tried Fedora was a few years ago with 1 or 2, can't remember which. I installed with hopes that it would be an improvement. well, while the distro looks very nice and polished, it isn't. in a 20 minutes time-span that I was testing it, several different applications froze 3 times (all that were auto-installed with the distro, I didn't put anything on up to that point). then, I got a full system freeze. my mouse froze, there was nothing I could do, no keyboard shortcut, nothing. I booted back into Ubuntu and promptly erased that partition.
 
Old 05-01-2006, 02:22 PM   #6
gwp
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Distribution: Redhat, Fedora, Ubuntu
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 4

Pros: Good when you're a RHEL sys admin
Cons: not polished ... old issues from FC2/3/4 still exist and unstable


I'm dissapointed... If RedHat was not so entrenched with certain major Hardware vendors I'd look at something else... Also no-one seems interested in contributing documentation...

I'm really keen on Ubuntu at this stage and if I see vendors adding support for it I would like to trash FC/RHEL

Old issues seem to flow from version to version and never get fixed...

I'm really not impressed which is sad as RedHat in the 7/8/9 days was probably the best distro in it's time, but it's getting a serious hiding these days
 
Old 05-01-2006, 05:22 PM   #7
Wheat_Thins
 
Registered: Nov 2005
Distribution: Primary: Ubuntu 8.10
Posts: 94

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 6

Pros: Good package manager, Nice appalets, Looks Purdy
Cons: UNSTABLE


How one system can go from Very good to bad with a release is beyond me, you are supposed to progress with newer distros, not take a step back in terms of stability.
 
Old 05-02-2006, 02:52 AM   #8
ulftho
 
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: stable, looks good, flexibel
Cons: none


My RH-experiences covers all versions of Fedora Core. I have earlier used SUSE 9.1 and 10.1 and Mandriva 10 tried Knoppix, Libranet and Lycoris. It is very difficult to judge one distribution as better then the other. However FC5 installed on my AMD-64 desktop is almost perfect. You can choose between a very large number of programs through a nice program installer The new Latex-editors KILE or Texmaker are excellent . All combinations of programs, easiness of choosing and installing programs makes FC5 to my favorite Linuxdistribution.
 
Old 05-02-2006, 08:09 PM   #9
 
Registered: Dec 1969
Posts: 0

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: stable , easy guided install, detected all hardware, looks good
Cons: a bit of a challenge for a newbie like me


I don't know why there are so many negitive reviews of fedora core 5 as i have come to like it. I wanted to give linux a try as i have been used to winxpand tried fedora because it looks good and easy to use, the inatll was pretty painless with grub detecting my windows and working first off, the interface is very nice and its very polished interface using gnome 2.14, i don't know what the kde interface looks like as haven't tried it. Otherwise hardware was all detected including my usb printer but not the scanner because it has no support in SANE. Installing apps apart from yum is a pain but with yum its very easy and everyting is updated in one go and the use of more than 1 repository makes it easy to install all the apps you need , i suggest that you follow a install guide for a newbie which maps how you should use yum and ainatll the major apps , but once you get used to it , its very good and evthing works seemlessly including 3d drivers , its much more secure than windows and installing rpm's is very easy with yum and genaerally when u get the hang of it , overall well recommeded !!!, looks amazing and works very well!! in most cases after a bit of work!!
 
Old 05-03-2006, 04:53 PM   #10
burntfuse
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Distribution: Slackware 10.1, FC5
Posts: 164

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 5

Pros: Lots of software included, cutting-edge versions
Cons: Dumbed-down installer, some unstable programs, some broken default settings


First of all, the installer wouldn't work on my 1 Ghz PIII desktop - even though the CDs passed the tests, it would complain that a package couldn't be found at completely random steps in the installation, and since the installer is more dumbed-down than before, there wasn't any option to skip the package - just a reboot button. It did work on a 1.5 Ghz Celeron M laptop, though. The selection of packages was very nice. The newest versions of GNOME, KDE, Eclipse, and many other programs were included. I initially used the preset installation options, wanting to get it over with quickly and figuring that I could customize it later. Well unfortunately, unlike with the nice package manager in RH9, the default settings for the package manager are set so that it only installs from the online repositories, so it requires an annoying workaround (which I still haven't gotten to work for me) to install from the CDs or DVD. This is something that they REALLY need to fix in the next release, possibly with a menu option to select the installation source.

Once installed, everything was fine, although RhythmBox is unstable at times and freezes GNOME too. The hardware detection worked fine, everything is pretty configurable thanks to the new more hackable version of GNOME and some additional Fedora-specific utilities, and the startup time is AMAZING (about 1 minute from when GRUB loads until everything is up and ready to use), at least compared to RH9 and RHEL4 which took forever to boot. One problem here - the search daemon isn't activated by default, due to a memory leak IIRC, so that takes a bit more tweaking that could completely turn off new users.

Overall, I think this has a lot of potential, and with some small changes it could be VERY good, but for now I'd recommend using something else, like Ubuntu or SuSE.
 
Old 05-12-2006, 01:22 AM   #11
rewtedesco
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Suse 10.0 /XP/ FC5 & 6
Posts: 93

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: Quite nice userinterface, both genome and kde work great
Cons: ndiswrapper not included, requires extra fixing for some wireless devices


I downloaded FC5 on a Suse 10.0 machine and burned the DVD there (btw, it is progress that many CD burners and DVD burners now actually work - thanks K3d), and then installed
on a Dell laptop.
I am used to have to do an installation three times before I finally get it right, and figure out which mistakes I have to avoid. This installation wasn't any different. It is a Dell Inspiron 4000 laptop with PIII, and fortunately it has a dvd device, so no playing the DJ. The issue was of course, following good old linux tradition, that the setup of X11 failed, which means one has one guess. I guessed wrong twice and each time, the only thing to do was switch the power off and start over. Pain in the neck! But you see, one forgets these things: one has to do the installation procedure only once (or three times in my case).

After that I had to hangle around for quite a while with ndiswrapper (a piece of software needed to be able to use
windows drivers for certain wireless devices). Even though there is no lack of good advice and quite detailed tutorials, little things can go wrong easily, and I had a good share of that. It would be nicer if ndiswrapper was
contained in the distribution of FC5, in my opinion, but there may be legit reasons for it not being part of FC5.

I think that the origin of most of the problems where because of infamiliarity with things like yum: Very powerful tool, and I recomment to read the description in
the Fedore project. For configuration purposes, I was used to Suse's yast, which is also a fantastic tool. But then I realized how easy it was under FC5 to set up things like cups printer and samba.

Basically everything is working fine now. I am impressed how much progress the gnome windows system has made, and I am also much impressed with the recent KDE 3.5.

Either user surface is now a lot more convenient than windows machines could ever be. Maybe Macs are superior to this, but I don't have a Mac.

I also tried wine again. It made some progress and I could use it to install windows drivers for the wireless device so it can run with a kernel module under linux (an ndiswrapper module that contains a windows driver). wine is to some extend integrated, so it can do now things like
autorun if one inserts windows installation disks, and it actually does install things - Whether they work is a different issue.

I really hope that things go further towards integration of
several operating systems. How about FC6 or FC7 comes with integrated wine environment (there are already elements of that in FC5) so one can open one of the 4 or 6 or 8 desktops and run XP, and run all the proprietary windows software that's installed there.

So in all: I am quite happy with FC5.
 
Old 05-13-2006, 09:15 AM   #12
TruongAn
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Distribution: Gentoo (desktop), Arch linux (laptop)
Posts: 728

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? yes | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 9

Pros: many up-to -date software, look quite nice without tweak.
Cons: bulky, as slow as always and even slower.


Fedora used to be my favorites distro before I switch to gentoo.
However I still loyal to FC since they are more up-to-date.
I bought the predownload and burn FC from a shop near my house, it cost me more than 2$ for it and I went to the installion straightly. Since many people complain that the media check report wrong problem, I skip it. I choose text mode installion because it run faster on my slow machine. 3 hours later, FC5 is up and running.

The operating sysem look nice but the cons aspect is that it is out-performanced by the heavily-tweaked-gentoo though I have minimize the installion and haven't touch it yet.

Since most of my wokrs are done on gentoo now, I don't have much things to complain about this OS. But in my point of view: Fedora Core is a easy of use OS, created to test the latest soft of the open source world. And that make it a getting-worse-overtime distro. However I can accept it.
The suggestion is that keep Fedora for fun and find another distro for your work.
 
Old 05-17-2006, 05:59 PM   #13
 
Registered: Dec 1969
Posts: 0

Rep: 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: 10

Pros: found to work better than other mainstream linux distributions
Cons: sound, dvd player, don't work immediately on NEC notebook


I wanted to find a distribution that worked without needing much system fixing on my NEC notebook (E6100). I tried a number of free versions: SUSE 10, Ubuntu, Debian (unstable), and FC5.

FC5 was the only one that worked immediately, e.g. without needing fixes for the LCD monitor.

My only complaint is that I have not managed (yet!) to get the sound card and dvd player working properly. I am not too bothered about this as I don't need it for my work.

yum worked fine, once I found a site that would allow ALL updates to come down (e.g. mirror.pacific.net.au) without complaining.

I give FC5 a 10 despite the lack of sound and DVD software, because I blame this more on NEC than RedHat - NEC notebooks have the "Designed for Windows XP" sticker ;-)
 
Old 05-23-2006, 01:57 PM   #14
trengen
 
Registered: May 2006
Posts: 2

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 4

Pros: User friendly features
Cons: System lock up, driver issues


There are some bugs with FC5 that need to be resolved. I installed FC5 to my Intel P4, 2.Hz with Ati Radeon video card. This combination did not work very well. I kept getting system lock up at system boot up, immediately after the splash screen. The system seemed to run very slow when multiple applications are opened. High frame drop rates made it impossible for multi-tasks and multimedia applications to work properly.
 
Old 05-24-2006, 02:02 AM   #15
wed1964
 
Registered: May 2006
Posts: 1

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?: None indicated | Rating: 8

Pros: easy install
Cons: cant get connected to internet


found fc5 very easy to install lots of up to date software although changed the layout of desktop as soon as i could didnt like the toolbar on top of the screen but very good othewise apart fromthe fact i cant get my speedtouch 330 modem to work
 
Old 05-25-2006, 04:31 AM   #16
abonnema
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Fedora (KDE)
Posts: 7

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 8

Pros: Is a good distribution with great community support
Cons: SE Linux is an extra protection, but difficult to manage and causes unexpected problems



I have been using FC for a while now (since FC1). I switched over from RH9. I have been fairly content with it up until now.

Packages
There is a lot of software to choose from. The package installer that is the basis for many GUI package installers in FC5 is yum. Personnaly I like the command line interface too much to start using the GUI interface, but really there is a lot of choice: yum, yumex, pup (for updates), pirut and probably there are others. They are all based on yum, but use a GUI.

Yum, Yumex, Pirut, Pup
One of the main advantages of yum is its automatic dependency resolver. In order to do this you need to choose which repositories you want and you have to be careful which repositories you combine: not all repos work well together. Basis is always core, update and extras. I have found livna to be very compatible with core, update and extras, but do not combine livna with other external repos like freerpms or the like. Rather choose the one that is best for you. If not sure, choose core, update, extras and livna.

Automatic updates
It is very easy to set up automatic updates, but I have chosen to just enter "yum update" from the commandline so I will know in advance which packages will be updated and specifically when a kernel update occurs. I always want to test a new kernel once before I accept it.

Repositories
FC5 is quite bleeding edge and will once in a while crash an application. Chances for a crash increase if you install non-Fedora packages, especially if they are not from one of the recognized repos, or if you mix non-compatible repos. A well known example of problems is installing java from Sun without checking the FC-READMEs and other documentation. Their implementation seems to overwrite important shared libraries causing problems. If you install using the appropriate instruction, no problems occur.

Communities
Another great thing about FC is the community. It has a number of very knowledgable people around that are really willing to help you. And even if you are new to Linux, or to FC, they point you in the right direction. But please, you do have to do the main work of searching and reparing problems yourself! Don't expect the community to do all the work for you.

SE-Linux, an extra line of defense
SE-Linux is one side of FC5 that is a recent addition to FC. It was added (I think) to FC4, but in FC5 it becomes more intrusively present. From the start I have had enough problems with it, that in the end I disabled it completely.

This is not a good thing, as SE-Linux is an extra line of defense. But, it caused so much hassle and I really wanted to go on with my business, so I disabled it.

Conclusion
I like FC5, it works and sometimes you need the community, which also gives great support, even though sometimes a question goes unanswered, partly because of the shere bulk of messages arriving daily, partly because of awkward frasing.

Bottomline: FC5 yes, but be prepared to have some amount of hassle. Otherwise, look for a hasslefree distribution (obviously less bleeding edge).
 
Old 05-27-2006, 10:31 PM   #17
jbannon
 
Registered: May 2006
Distribution: Fedora Core 6
Posts: 12

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 6

Pros: Decent support on the forum
Cons: Very buggy in initial release


Installation:
Having previously been on FC4 and before that Gentoo, this release does have its problems. Getting the installer to work first time is a hassle because of the buggy kernel and if you're doing anything complicated like dual boot then you're in for a hard time. Also, in spite of its "bleeding edge" reputation, it doesn't support many common devices like SATA drives (at least not out of the box). It's fine if, like me, you're running an IDE drive as a master but otherwise quite difficult.

Yum is fairly easy to use, though, as with other distros I've tried, working out the dependencies can be a bit mysterious. Do not use Pirut to install anything as it's completely hopeless - it's far too slow and buggy. Get rid of it and the same goes for the Graphical boot. Use Yumex instead as it's much better though it can still have problems getting content from the mirrors.

Tools:
Somewhat surprisingly, although things like GCC are well up-to-date, they all have i386 as a common denominator. As I have a 2.2GHz P4 processor etc, this means I'm not getting the best out of the tools. Performance is adequate however.

For development tools the "standard" offering appears to be Eclipse but the implementation of this is absolutely awful. It's dreadfully slow, it doesn't like the Sun J2SE and breaks whenever the Eclipse update tool is run. If you're an Eclipse user then use the vanilla version from the Eclipse.org web site rather than the Fedora version. The KDE development tools are of the usual standard and are the ones I use because of the paucity of tools offered for Gnome.

Office Apps:
These are of the usual quality though Firefox is a tad slow (use nautilus to get rid of all the language packs that come as default). The current version of OpenOffice is OK and is improved if you install the Sun J2SE.

Multimedia:
Setting this up is a bit of a hassle because of all the licensing issues surround MP3 and the like. You can get suitable dlls for these though and once they're installed the multimedia side is OK with all the usual presentation tools being available.

Summary:
All in all, not too bad but it's still a bit on the rough side.
 
Old 05-28-2006, 03:05 PM   #18
jesuscakes
 
Registered: May 2006
Posts: 83

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 4

Pros: Fast and easy install
Cons: Doesn't work at all with my hardware and could never see anything when it booted.


Well I tried to install it on my dual 7800 GT SLI system to no avail. I then tried to install the driver through the linux terminal in text mode to no avail. I guess I was just not meant to run fedora.
 
Old 05-31-2006, 01:43 PM   #19
mrmeetze
 
Registered: May 2006
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 8

Pros: Easy for people new to Linux, includes plenty of software, built in server options, nice look
Cons: Long install time, and if you use multiple CDs to install it can be tedious


When I first got started with Linux about a year ago, my first OS I double booted with was Red Hat Fedora Linux. I have not had much time to play with other distros, so to some people this review may be bias.

First off, if you download Fedora I really recommend getting a DVD iso. Don't do the 5 CD download because:
1) Many CD's to pop in and out
2) I've had so many problems trying to install with multiple CDs. When I did a DVD I had no problem. Maybe its just me?

Fedora is great for people new to Linux, who just want to get their feet wet with the new world of free software. It includes both KDE and Gnome desktops. Another thing I really enjoyed about Fedora is it include PLENTY of software such as Open Office, PHP, MySQL, Apache, Developer tools, GIMP, etc. And again this is for people new to Linux, the Fedora system comes with YUM and RPMS. RPMS are very similar to the typical "setup.exe" you would find in Windows. Yum (Yellowdog Update Manager) is another easy way to install software and upgrade the system if needed.

Now for the things I really didn't like. Like I said I haven't had time to explore other operating systems, since I'm still in school and constantly staying busy. Fedora 5 took a very long time to install. When I popped it in my HP Laptop (ze4400) and it gave me the option to upgrade I was like, "Wow I don't have to download the update DVD iso!" So I updated from 4 to 5. Little did I know it would take almost an hour and 30 minutes. So while it was installing I watched "Meet the Fockers". After the movie ended, it was still installing.
Now this is in the past, but as I mentioned above I used to download the 4 iso images and have 4 CDs to juggle around with. When I was installing Core 4 on my laptop it kept giving me error after error, and I about gave up. I've noticed this on many computers, there it is really picky about its installation. For example, on my laptop I had to enter the GUI with some kind of ending on the command for monitors. Then it installed fine. No problems. Maybe its me!

Overall, I highly recommend Red Hat Fedora to anyone who is looking at getting their feet wet with Linux and the Open Source world. Just be sure to download or purchase a DVD iso instead of multiple CDs.

-Malcolm
 
Old 06-04-2006, 09:47 AM   #20
peter_89
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Distribution: Microsoft Windows XP Professional SP2; Slackware Linux 10.2
Posts: 215

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 2

Pros: Pretty colors, reasonably fast boot
Cons: Stupid development decision making, not dialup friendly, unstable, doesn't install even basic development tools, no kernel sources installed, crummy printer driver installed


After my bad experiences with Fedora Cores 3 and 4, I, perhaps out of necessity, had my hopes up for Fedora Core 5. As to why, I will never know, but what I do know is that I wasted six days downloading the DVD for such an operating system.
I suppose I shall explain my journey chronologically, therefore starting with the install process.
The install went as expected. Anaconda, as you will probably know if you are reading this review, has recieved a much-needed facelift this release. Everything is much less cluttered and there are no longer installation helper notes on the left hand side of the screen. Nothing else is really worthy of noting in this part, since it picked up my devices fine and no stability issues were present. Although, one thing I do have to note is that either there is no screen for setting up the bootloader, or I missed the option entirely, since I rebooted with the Fedora GRUB installed but not knowing exactly where it wrote it to. I do suspect, however, that I just missed a rather well-hidden option tree. A warning to future installers of Fedora Core 5.
I rebooted and, as expected was shown a bootloader with the new Bubbles theme installed. It went into the Setup Agent and I finished the install process. Again, nothing worthy of noting here since everything was picked up and worked correctly. Once it was complete I was shown the login screen and was using Fedora Core 5.
I have to say, the boot process is notably faster than that of SUSE or Mandriva, on my machine at least. The only other nice thing I can really say is that the Fedora team really spent some good time on designing the new theme. I was blown away by it, and it certainly is gorgeous. I honestly wish other distribution teams would spend the time to make such attractive environments as the Fedora team did (and yes, I am a fan of heavier desktop environments. I admit it.). Unfortunately, this is the last good thing this distribution did for me, and for most of the time all I could do was stare at the pretty icons and watch the boot progress bar chug along at a reasonable speed.
It is quite sad really, as most of the problems I encountered had nothing to do with bugs, but rather apparantly stupid and impractical decision making on the part of the developers. My adventure started when I decided to install the official NVIDIA drivers, thus an exposition as to what is exactly wrong with this distribution. The init command does not work. It's as if they left out some rather basic utilities. It's entered, but Bash can't even find the command and yes, I was it root. So I was left with having to manually edit my inittab file and reboot to get into runlevel 3. I ran the installer but was informed that the binutils package, and thereofore ld and as, wasn't installed. With no working init command I changed inittab again to reboot into runlevel 5. I opened up the package manager but discovered that binutils apparantly wasn't included, making me wonder what exactly the developers were thinking. I download an RPM and had it installed. Easy enough. I edited inittab again and rebooted to runlevel 3, but was told by the installer that neither GCC nor the kernel sources were installed. No GCC? After all these years, still not all distributions include GCC? I tried it myself and confirmed that it was indeed not installed. Startx. Package manager tells me that downright no development tools were installed at all. Thinking I could possibly install them manually, I selected the development tools package and after waiting ten minutes for the progress bar to move discovered that it had apparantly decided to download everything. I'm on dialup here and am getting damn frustrated with developers who somehow have the idea that everybody can just download their entire software selection. Does this not defeat the entire purpose of making somebody download a DVD to get all of your software? Did I just spend all that time for nothing? I was left with an unchangeable software selection and with perhaps the least of my problems being I couldn't get the NVIDIA driver installed. After fiddling around for a while I eventually discovered that, at least on my box, leaving any program running idle for more than ten minutes makes it freeze and I have to force a quit on it to get at least relative stability back.The printer driver it installed for me cuts off the top two lines, a problem I've never had with another distribution.
Note that my devices were at least detected.
Anybody who likes the layout of Fedora but doesn't want a crummy experience like most anybody else should look at CentOS. It's an enterprise distribution based off of RHEL, meaning it doesn't have the latest features but everything works as advertized. I've never had a bad experience with them and they even install the kernel sources by default.
 
Old 06-08-2006, 12:06 AM   #21
Peingune
 
Registered: Oct 2002
Distribution: Gentoo x86 2006.0
Posts: 89

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 7

Pros: easy installation, yum, and it's RH
Cons: very basic non dept installation, no kernel source in installation, ect


I played with RH products since 7.3 and well I find Fedora Core to be stable, user friendly, and robust. If your a past RH user and looking for a easy distro to get back into the linux world then Fedora Core is for you but if you are looking for a more less user friendly distro then the Fedora Core is no use for you.
 
Old 06-08-2006, 09:51 AM   #22
ride153
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Distribution: current is PCLOS (server) and Suse (desktop)
Posts: 102

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 9

Pros: the 64bit version is great
Cons: burning the 5 CDs is a pain, needs custimizing after install


im running Fedora 5 x86-64 as a server (no gui) its pretty fast and stable plus all my 32bit apps are working great!

Fedora 5 does need a lot of tweaking after install but i usually expect that when installing a linux OS so no big deal.

beware that upgrading the kernel from 2.6.15 to 2.6.16 caused some small issues with 32bit apps i am using.
 
Old 06-08-2006, 03:35 PM   #23
newbiesforever
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Distribution: Distro-homeless. Lost.
Posts: 1,892

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 2

Pros: Installed smoothly
Cons: Refuses to view Windows partition; does not have Ndiswrapper


The only good thing I can say about Fedora Core 5 is that the installation was smooth, if quite time-consuming (obviously because it's very large).

FC5 would not let me look into my Windows partition, even using the root account, where it still said "permissions denied." There was no obvious way--again, this was in root--to change the permissions. This made FC5 useless for my purposes: since I was between distros, I had some needed files (Ndiswrapper, my wireless drivers, and saved web pages containing various sets of instructions) saved on the Windows partition and expected to be able to copy them over. I have never seen a distro that not only won't allow the root account to view a Windows partition but can't be set up to do so.

The reason this made FC5 useless is because I was hoping to run my wireless network with it--that's the only reason I was hopping distros--and the console indicated that Ndiswrapper is not available.

Finally, Konqueror has some odd-looking buttons that make it less aesthetically pleasing than in other distros. This is a petty concern.

GRADE: F
 
Old 06-08-2006, 03:41 PM   #24
newbiesforever
 
Registered: Apr 2006
Distribution: Distro-homeless. Lost.
Posts: 1,892

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 0

Pros: same
Cons: same


Addendum to my review: I'm particularly irritated because unlike with most others distros I try, I paid for this. I'd say it was a total waste of my money, except that the seller threw in a free copy of Linspire, which I haven't tried.
 
Old 06-13-2006, 02:28 PM   #25
rony358
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Distribution: fedora core 4
Posts: 8

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 9

Pros: faster,easy for the eye,better stability,boots faster,updated
Cons: the rpm package manager is missing


A lot more faster than older versions.Thoroughly updated and really good looking with the new default theme.Boots faster.
 
Old 06-13-2006, 02:33 PM   #26
joesnow
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Fedora Core 4
Posts: 23

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 9

Pros: very easy to learn on
Cons: packaging system


I started on FC4, and have tried almost all other major linux distros, I keep coming back to Fedora and FC5 in my experience was a vast improvement upon FC4 stability-wise.

I think they should have focused more on alternative package distribution instead of leaving us with pretty much only yum as a the only viable option. Yes you can install others, but why not have others preinstalled and supported? Yum is powerful, yes, but there are those times where it does nothing but hinder you when it comes to reinstalling things that break.

Other than the packaging I love the distro. Especially since I'm able to go between KDE and Gnome w/o noticing any "lack of support" for either DE in regard to anything distro specific. I run the full entourage of wine products > wine, cedega, crossover, and they all work very well.

FC5 seems to be very hardware specific too, in *most* installs on different machines it works very very well, whereas there are those few I've run into that make me wonder if i was using the same Install DVD as the others or not. Some fresh installs on some machines seem to have extra icons and features preinstalled on the desktop whereas others dont. Some hardware setups can get the nvidia drivers working seamlessly whereas others can't get it to work at all on an SMP kernel. It's really strange to me, but fortunately all my hardware plays nice with it.

My other favorites are SUSE 10.1 and Ubuntu 6.06, although I feel very constrained in those 2 distros ( in regard to distro-specific placement of directories,apps,menus,etc ) compared to FC5.

I'm always open to a better choice for myself, and I would embrace i completely if i found one, but for now FC5 does it for me.
 
Old 06-15-2006, 10:55 AM   #27
d_GeNeRiT
 
Registered: May 2004
Distribution: Fedora Core 5
Posts: 28

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 10

Pros: Noob-Friendly install with GUI, Fast, great online support, visually appealing, bleeding edge of innovation!
Cons: gnome-mount sucks, Bloated 5 disc install


I dont understand these talentless hacks who are bad mouthing FC 5. This is a bleeding edge distro so you get all the newest software that you will wait months for until its "stable" if you go with Suse 10 or Ubuntu.

If you want to learn Linux there is no better distro out htere than FC 5. If you want to get certified as a Red Hat Systems Engineer than this is the distro you want to learn right here. If you are gonna become a Linux system admin then you better know RedHat, thats what the top companies are running. Fedora Core is almost identical to Red Hat, its the beta, cutting edge version of Red Hat that gets released before Red Hat adopts the stable improvements into the next release of Red hat.

I began Linux 6 months ago with Fedora Core 4 and found the community at fedoraforum.org to be the most helpful community EVER. 90% of my questions are answered within 24 hours. Also this here forum is a very valuable resource as well.

I do my HTML editing, CD burning, DVD copying, DVD encoding, Photo editing, emailing, webcam chat, IRC, torrent downloading and even use MS Office 2003 thru CrossOver Office right here on FC 5. There is NOTHING I do on a PC that I have not been able to do with FC 5. I keep a 20 GB partition of WIn XP Pro on my PC just for when my sister comes over because she is scared of Linux. Otherwise I would delete that. Get FC 5, you will not regret it. Throw MS Windows XP into the garbage like a bag of burnt popcorn.
 
Old 06-24-2006, 04:25 PM   #28
cynicalicious
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: FC4
Posts: 3

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation:
Would you recommend the product? no | Price you paid?: None indicated | Rating: 3

Pros: Pretty Graphics on the Install Screens
Cons: The installer constantly died. This distro is not ready for the general public.


I've been partical to RHL for a long time, partly because it's a local company (I live in the RTP, NC area), and because I have a lot of IBM friends (who also use RHL). I'm not a linux power-user: just a general user who isn't on the Bleeding Edge.

I had a nice and (relatively) stable FC4 system that for some silly reason I decided to wipe out and replace with FC5.

Day 1: I picked up one of those 10-pound Fedora Core 5 books, so I can have a reference to the newer features, and a DVD with the OS already on it. I figured that I could save some time downloading/burning a DVD. Oh, how I wish I had known...

So I start trying to install from the FC5 DVD, after the installer assures me that the DVD is just fine. My first impressions: it's graphically pleasing, but somewhat annoying. I can't quite put my finger on why, but the installer just seems a bit off. Maybe it's the way the disk partitioning/formatting program doesn't bother to mention that if you don't format all of the volumes, the installer will crash. (Which it did.)

So I try again. This time, I set up my LVM mounts, my swap, boot, and root, tell it to format them all, and pick the pacakages I need. (I think.) Package picking is still an annoying process. So many packages I will never need, yet no way to know that for sure. Once I pick my poisons, it formats everything. Success! And then it starts installing! Woohoo! And then it crashes all to hell with an error blaming the DVD. (The same DVD it just said was just fine.)

So I give up and go to bed. I'm not in the mood to do this again today.

Day 2: I spend 3 hours downloading various CD/DVD ISOs. Then I spend the rest of the day trying to find decent CD/DVD burning software for my laptop, which has suddenly decided that it doesn't like these ISOs. I find Alcohol 120%. I spend money. It burns the DVD beautifully. The installer says 'thumbs up' to my DVD. Whoopie!

So I go to install again. I make it though package-selecting hell, and the installer hangs on a package. Again. I fight the urge to shoot the computer and just go to bed. (Because by now it's midnight.)

Day 3 (today, actually): I (foolishly) try to install from the DVD again. Whoops, there goes another hour... and it crashes again. So I decide to try the CD ISOs. I burn them (takes another hour or so), and verify them using the installer. "Nice CDs!" the installer assures me. Liar.

I go through package selection purgatory once more... and it just freezes on the install screen.

So yeah, 3 days of my life I'm not getting back, and now I'm going distro shopping.
 
Old 06-30-2006, 09:18 AM   #29
introuble
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: Debian -unstable
Posts: 700

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 10

Pros:
Cons:


It's a great operating system if you know what you are doing.
 
Old 07-01-2006, 11:12 AM   #30
adamt222
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Distribution: Ubuntu/Crunchbang
Posts: 11

Rep: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: Reputation: 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: 8

Pros: Apache server worked right away
Cons: buttons/links get selected for strange reason on laptop, licensing


I have been using Linux for a few years now, and I really like this distro. I have FC4 on a desktop with so many customized settings, I don't wanna update to FC5 to get the bubbles. I keep the OS up to date with yum extender, and it allows me many benefits, such as the newer KDE 3.5 which really is nice.

On a Dell Laptop, I have FC5 cause it was a new install after erasing windows xp from it. I burned the DVD from the desktop, and away I went. I've heard some failure stories with the Broadcom wi-fi, but I haven't tested it just yet with the laptop. Since I'm still in "setup mode" i've been connecting it via ethernet until all is good. The wifi test comes this weekend, and of course I will bring an ethernet cable "just in case".

Anyway, I think an important decision-driver for which Distro one chooses should be "what do they need from the distro"..... as we have read here, some will use it for a lot of multimedia, etc.

I'm a web designer/programmer, and Fedora just seems well-suited to the tasks, and provides a lot of great apps right out of the box. I chose Fedora after trying a few popular distros such as Mepis, Ubuntu, Mandrake, and recently, Suse 10.1

I liked them (and disliked them) for different reasons.
Mepis - very good Java support. Ubuntu- bad java support, wouldn't play back too many file formats. Suse 10.1, had a lot of trouble setting up Apache & PHP.

Fedora - ok, so it doesn't play .mp3 files, but I can live with that. I would love it if I could, so my sound files wouldn't be limited to .ogg only, but we can't have it all.

I installed Fedora with a very customized setup for my web design and programming needs. Apache & PHP work with minor tweaks. Great distro for web designers and coders, in my opinion.
 
Page:  1 · 2 More Items




  



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:22 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement

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