Weekly Edition
Return to the Distributions page
| |||||||||||||||||||
Fedora 10 End of Life
This announcement is a reminder that as of 2009-12-17, Fedora 10 has reached its end of life for updates. As planned, last update pushes to Fedora 10 were made in advance[1] of this date, to accommodate the move of some Fedora infrastructure[2]. Fedora 11 will continue to receive updates until approximately one month after the release of Fedora 13. * * * [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-announce/200... https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-announce/200... [2] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2009... -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -- fedora-announce-list mailing list fedora-announce-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-announce-list (Log in to post comments)
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 16:49 UTC (Fri) by sunr2007 (guest, #59024) [Link]
This is wat i hate abt fedora and other linux distros . A distro is
supported for only 1 year of time and as soon as user gets familar with a particular version a new version is released. Earlier it was better . now i think with every 6 months release cycle . no distro can be called stable !! . instead they should release a distro every year .
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 16:57 UTC (Fri) by patrick_g (subscriber, #44470) [Link]
Use Debian Stable...or CentOS...or Ubuntu LTS, etc
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 22, 2009 15:28 UTC (Tue) by compte (guest, #60316) [Link]
Turning to Debian or Debian based distros, like Ubuntu, for someone used to rpms implies a major adaptation since these are not rpm based. If you plan to make use of the GUI and little else than Ubuntu could do but... must not forget that Eeebuntu 4.0 changed to Debian Unstable because "Ubuntu is proving more difficult to customize with each release".
CentOS is Red Hat and Fedora based but has too few packages outside is main files. Other distros don't surpass Fedora and are a small community or are not free. There are up-to-date firefox versions for fc10 in par with fc12, these don't appear in the Updates page. RHEL seems to be the only viable and stable option but I would like to hear other thoughts.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 22, 2009 17:31 UTC (Tue) by nevyn (subscriber, #33129) [Link]
With CentOS/RHEL you can also install the EPEL repo. which doubles the
package count. That might also climb when 6.0 hits, and people (semi- )automatically get F12 => EPEL packages ... but realistically there just isn't going to be the same kind of package count in RHEL+EPEL as in Fedora.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 17:08 UTC (Fri) by michich (subscriber, #17902) [Link]
I'm not sure how long it really takes to get familiar with a particular version, but it's not like you have to relearn everything from scratch every time. The differences between releases are never completely revolutionary. I certainly never felt unfamiliar after upgrading to a new release.
Maybe you would be happier with Red Hat Enterprise Linux (or a clone) and its many years long support.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 17:59 UTC (Fri) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link]
Even though the difference between two releases of a distribution might not be "revolutionary", there's bound to be an application or two there which redesigned its user interface in the past year, which is really annoying. I mean someone upgrades the distribution to get a newer Firefox, then it turns out that the message text area in pidgin can't be resized anymore. I'm sure there are hundreds of issues like this.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 17:16 UTC (Fri) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
Please don't lump "other Linux distros" in with Fedora. Fedora is the *only* Linux distro with
such an ephemeral (13 month) support period. Most anything else will get you support ranging from 18 months to 7 years. This is a *Fedora* issue. Not a Linux issue. And it's sad to see Linux getting a bad name from it.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 18:22 UTC (Fri) by mmcgrath (subscriber, #44906) [Link]
> And it's sad to see Linux getting a bad name from it.
Citation needed.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:20 UTC (Fri) by apolinsky (subscriber, #19556) [Link]
It's sort of curious that Freebsd 8.0 was released within the last month or so with Fedora 10 as the core of its Linux compatibility subsystem.
Alan
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 21, 2009 0:33 UTC (Mon) by motk (subscriber, #51120) [Link]
He's still nursing a grudge that dates back to RH9 when RHL split.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 20:00 UTC (Fri) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
Personally, I'd be more than happy if Fedora had a 6 monthly releases cycle, with 2 months of overlap with the previous release, for people to get off it. I'd say more bugs would get fixed that way, because nobody would have to care about the "old" stuff.
People that want to install and forget can run something else.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 23:41 UTC (Fri) by Pc5Y9sbv (guest, #41328) [Link]
Yes, I enjoy the frequent updates of Fedora as well. I've been mostly doing online yum upgrades from one to the next.
What I wish they had was an option to get a continuous upgrade that incrementally brought a system feature by feature through the years without the artificial batching of a release. The ideal package stream for me would just bring in each sub-graph of dependent packages as they went through individual rawhide/testing/update cycles without being grouped together with and delayed for many other irrelevant packages.
I am a software engineer, and do understand that this would probably require a lot more development, packaging, and test effort; I know there are currently lots of hacks where full dependencies are not captured in RPM metadata due to assumptions about core development or runtime system content.
But from a user perspective, I think this would be a great feature!
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 19, 2009 10:18 UTC (Sat) by carenas (subscriber, #46541) [Link] You probably would like to look at Fedora Rawhide once/if they get the Stable Rawhide proposal forward. on the other hand and sincerely without any attempt of being a distribution troll, what you describe for would be better served by a "rolling release" distribution like "Debian Unstable" or "Gentoo"
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:18 UTC (Fri) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link]
What I don't like about Fedora is:
I reported a bug within a month of F10 being released. No one touched then. Then yesterday I get a response giving a WONTFIX because F10 has been EOL. I've seen other Fedora bugs like this as well.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:31 UTC (Fri) by rriggs (subscriber, #11598) [Link]
I am sure everyone has experienced this at one time or another. I have also had the case (quite recently actually) of a developer taking a keen interest in a bug report. In that case I was the weak link in the chain. It's the crap shoot that you have with non-commercial software. For those things that require responsive support, I pay Red Hat for RHEL and get good support.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:51 UTC (Fri) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link]
I disagree. This way seems to be uniquely Fedora (well, maybe not "unique" but "a characteristic of"). I use other "community" distros and never really experience this, at least not as much as I've seen with Fedora.
The only exception I can think off offhand is Evolution (the upstream bugzilla) where they will sit on a bug and after one or two major version updates they won't explicitely WONTFIX the bug but say "try this on the latest and report back" and then NEEDINFO it. This is also very annoying (but at least the bug stays open).
Yeah, my particular bug is something that will probably never make it into RHEL (it's not an enterprisey thing) so it's likely that it will never make it to RHEL and thus never need to be supported. I think they know this and that is why they just sit on it.
Compare this to other community distros that don't have a commercial big brother. They're usually more responsive on bug reports.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 20:10 UTC (Fri) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
> Evolution
For every bug fixed in Evolution, at least two new are reported, according to my completely unscientific and totally unreliable research ;-)
Seriously, there is so much proposed but unfinished functionality in there that a few folks working on it cannot keep up (not making an excuse, just an observation). Evolution is both an indispensable tool for someone with only OWA/MAPI mail access and a total and utter disaster. I reckon I spend more time every day mopping up after Evolution crashes than any other single thing I do.
Right now, I'm waiting for Evolution to fetch one of the big folders off Exchange, using MAPI. It's been doing that for the last half an hour. And before that, it did fetch that folder, but there were no subjects. So, a rinse/repeat cycle was in order. Fun... ;-)
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 20:24 UTC (Fri) by seyman (subscriber, #1172) [Link]
> I disagree. This way seems to be uniquely Fedora (well, maybe not "unique"
> but "a characteristic of"). I use other "community" distros and never > really experience this, at least not as much as I've seen with Fedora.
Those of us who maintain packages in Fedora and work hard to fix bugs as
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:46 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
The WONTFIX emails are done as part of automated bugzilla janitorial work at release EOL. The text of the emails encourage you to re-open them against current versions of Fedora if they are still applicable. As the bug reporter you are the best person to know if the bug is still happening in current release versions.
What you would prefer happen to stale bugs against EOL'd releases? I realize that ideally bugs should never get that stale.. but it happens for a variety of reasons. The automated closure is done in part to help prevent stale bugs from just lingering unnoticed for years.
-jef
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:54 UTC (Fri) by marduk (subscriber, #3831) [Link]
Yeah, but if I have to wait a year to re-report a bug, that doesn't exactly encourage me to want to participate in the report-fix-release cycle? And what's to say reporting it in F11 will fix it or just have it sat on until F12?
I resolved my issue by switching to another distro that didn't have the bug.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 20:29 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
You don't have to wait. You can ping the bug and try to get the maintainer's attention. And if that fails there is even an unresponsive maintainer process which can be followed as an escalation and to make other contributors aware. There's even a fast tracking if its a critical issue.
Bugs fall through..such is life. It really does help sometimes it helps if the reporter comes back a couple of weeks later and requests a progress report. When responding to bugs I try to give people a time frame to check back with me in case the bug gets pushed down priority stack by more critical work.
-jef
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 19, 2009 11:06 UTC (Sat) by tuna (guest, #44480) [Link]
You don't have to wait a year. You can try Rawhide or the next relase and tag the bug to either of those (if it still exists). Or you can file it upstream (which is usually the most correct thing to do).
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 21, 2009 17:18 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] Then you could have reported that $OTHER_DISTRO doesn't have the bug...
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 19, 2009 20:09 UTC (Sat) by luya (subscriber, #50741) [Link]
You can reopen the bug if it still exists on current release.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:26 UTC (Fri) by MattPerry (guest, #46341) [Link]
I thought there was an independent project to support Fedora releases after they were officially end-of-life. Is that project still around?
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 19:37 UTC (Fri) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
No, it turns out that (not ragging on any particular individuals) moaning that Fedora's cycle is too short is a lot easier than actually putting together and distributing fixes for an additional say 12 months.
Someone else will dig up the LWN articles about that project's troubles and final winding up no doubt.
Fedora Legacy Posted Dec 18, 2009 22:42 UTC (Fri) by markhb (guest, #1003) [Link]
I'm not sure about the LWN articles, but their old site and link to the relevant mailing lists is at http://www.fedoralegacy.org .
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 18, 2009 20:24 UTC (Fri) by xaoc (guest, #54140) [Link]
openSUSE has longer support. At the same time you can easily get recent software from its "build service" compiled for a handful of older releases.
Fedora 10 End of Life Posted Dec 21, 2009 7:18 UTC (Mon) by lkundrak (subscriber, #43452) [Link]
While Build Service is rather useful for, well, building the packages, but using it as a software source is not always a good idea.
I have used openSUSE for some time now and what bothers me that I have had to configure a lot of extra repositories to get various software bits I needed. Just because the maintainers considered dropping the packages into build service enough, not bothering getting them accepted into contrib. Needless to say, besides not being nearly as comfortable and having lost track of what are sources of software I use and developers I trust (which would be a potential security problem) it made zypper a lot slower than yum in Fedora. Lack of proper review (that's, I presume, needed for contrib) shows in rather low quality of lot of packages around build service.
I just can't understand how do you consider this to be a feature. Indeed, it is a feature, for a couple of geeks that hack on packages for openSUSE, not something I'd tell my friends to use.
|
|||||||||||||||||||