Install fedora

i'm sure it's some legal thing, since it's redhat's project

based fedora

Does fedora support Bcache OOB?

Like can I just make a Bcache partition and install it without jumpint through hoops?

*Tips hat*
t.Fedora Project contributor.
You're welcome user.

I just wanted to share a movie with someone, so I setup a webserver. After everything was setup the way I'm used to it I was getting a permission denied error, even tough the file had all the permissions for anyone. After a long time I found out that the file still was in the user_home_t SELinux context because I just moved it to the default webserver location. Webservers aren't allowed to access files from that context.

you guys don't shill this shit well enough if it took me years to finally try it, also mq-deadline should ship default. make that happen, will ya?

Are you using it for work? If yes, how stable it is?

I'm sort of pissed at Ubuntu at this point and planned to switch to Debian with XFCE and just do my work in peace. So sick of fucking Gnome.

huh. well i suppose that'd be a good thing if you got pwned but that stuff should be better documented
yes, using it for unity3d development. haven't had anything crash or even throw an error so far.

>nvidia makes shitty drivers
>blames it on linux
retard

Yes, it worked as intended, the only issue was that this is not discussed very often online because everyone thinks debianoid distros are the best thing ever.

they do. all i'm saying is that fedora knew how to deal with it without the user having to fuck with grub configs

>no packages

Do you get SE troubleshooter notifications?

>also mq-deadline should ship default. make that happen, will ya?
I'm not involved with that one, but there's been a raging debate between mq-deadline and BFQ for the kernel 4.21 release.
Maybe you'll lucky desu.
lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]/thread/MHO7A2QGV3ZQLFFMZ5OZVX6LFRH6RGDN/

fedora is great
too bad KDE is still a pile of shit otherwise I'd have no complains at all anymore

you can do the old fashioned way of installing the nvidia driver, for me it's the only way to get shit working.

Imagine being that stupid

I use Fedora KDE every day and it's great.
I mean Discover sucks, but that's a universal rule of KDE.
I've heard KDE on Wayland sucks, but Xorg is the default, so no problem.

Ubuntu good, fedora bad.

i haven't so far, but maybe if i were running a server rather than a workstation i would run into selinux issues.
well at least they're on top of it. bfq or mq-deadline it's better than cfq.
agreed. gnome does piss me off with its inflexibility, but KDE just still has too many usability issues.

GNOME is ok for me. Seems to just work if you don't care about customization. What I wish they have done in terms of features is tiling like in windows 10. I like it so much, so nicely done.

that's a dead meme, the only reason it seems other distros have more packages is that e.g. when installing ffmpeg on fedora you install
* ffmpeg
* ffmpeg-devel

on debian you install
* ffmpeg
* libavcodec
* libavformat
* libavutil
* libswscale
* libavcodec-dev
* libavformat-dev
* libavutil-dev
* libswscale-dev

It's not. Red Hat doesn't ship proprietary software unless it's required for the OS to work, like some binary blobs. Since nouveau exists, they don't ship nvidia drivers.
Red Hat are the good guys, contributing more to FOSS than any other, but this board will endlessly shit on them.

why doesn't stallman approve then? did they use a word or phrase he doesn't like?

>holy shit, Jow Forums had me spend years with autistic distros like arch and gentoo that didn't work. all this time i thought linux was just too unstable
pretty much. fedora just werks, literally the most professional and polished of the linux distros. thank you based red hat for creating a distro that isn't a clown show of hobbyists pretending to know how to computer.

> >latest software
> >stable
"Stable" does not mean just "doesn't crash", it means "its behavior doesn't change between versions". Fedora is not stable by that definition.

Stable means "doesn't crash" for anyone but Debian fagets.

How about you look at RHEL or CentOS?

plus
>installing packages doesn't activate shitty services like debian
Red Hat is carrying Linux.
fedora is community based, some fedora maintainers also check and maintain those packages. Anyways, those are proprietary drivers. I rather install them from the page
I'm pretty sure they use Debian distros because unstable or testing keep rolling mostly compatible versions from time to time. Fedora 28 and 29 for example don't have that much of compatibility between packages so people can't jew them out and fork to shitty distros because they would have to actually maintain the packages. Not that Debian is better, in fact using their packages as a lot of problems with reverse dependencies.
fuck off retard, stability is always about "does work", and is also in regards to security "who what where". There is CentOS which backports fixes to old versions to avoid regressions, achieving stability.
But grabbing a beta package that is 8 years old doesn't make it stable retard
>hurr ddurr

v diamond largely-emphasized-close-button

> But grabbing a beta package that is 8 years old
What does it have to do with anything. Are you imagining things?

> There is CentOS which backports fixes to old versions to avoid regressions, achieving stability.
So... Fedora isn't stable?

Have anybody tried Silverblue version? Is it ready enough and have they made good ammount of flatpaks you can install (and made it secure)?

>behavior doesn't change between versions
just use a beta package for 8 years changing the package version number and you effectively achieved stability in your terms, retard.
That doesn't achieve stability.
Fedora does the same retard, read their update policy. Fedora X version will not change package base versions unless backporting a security fix is not viable.

this is the big marketing lie that made desktop linux fail. stable is not a desirable attribute for end users. end users want reliability, low maintenance and recent feature sets at the same time. Debian fails with the recent features, Fedora with the low maintenance(maybe, because upgrading to a newer version works pretty flawlessly lately.)

Attached: debate.webm (1280x720, 2.85M)

>issues have you had with SELinux
Not him but I can tell you that there's a whole lot of them and you will run into them and be forced to learn how to setup selinux permissions.

Short story is that your average GNU/Linux system has read, write and execute permissions for user, group and all. Fedora has SELinux permissions on top of that which must be set correctly or things don't work. You will have to set SELinux permissions on folders correctly to use samba, nfs, mpd, web servers and a lot of other things like that.

I'm not saying that it's difficult to learn or manage, you can (even though there's not that much in terms of documentation beyond manual pages). I'm just saying that if you're coming from another distribution you'll initially be asking yourself "why doesn't this work? why do I get permission denied when the file's world readable?" and wondering wtf.

SELinux isn't limited to files, btw. If you'd like to run ssh on a non-standard port - something I like to do because people will scan for responses on port 22 and try to brute-force - you can't do that until you run semanage port -a -t ssh_port_t -p tcp 888 which allows sshd to listen on that port.

> Fedora X version will not change package base versions
But then again, Fedora changes versions even faster than a non-LTS Ubuntu. Two releases, 27 and 28, for example, were done in half a year.
> just use a beta package for 8 years changing the package version number and you effectively achieved stability in your terms, retard.
Oh, I get what you're trying to say. Please note, I said
> "Stable" does not mean just "doesn't crash", it means "its behavior doesn't change between versions"
Basically, if I were to break down that sentence for you, it means "it doesn't crash" plus "its behavior doesn't change".
However, with Fedora's release cycle, EOLing its releases in a year, it could as well be a rolling release.

regular desktop usage rarely has problems with SELinux nowadays.

nah, I don't think anyone cares about new features. What we care is about compatibility.
CentOS as old as it may be is as efficient as Ubuntu 18.04 LTS or Debian 9, sometimes even better in benchmarks. The problem is retarded developers, they somehow NEED fucking new versions of libraries to make something work, as if the old versions weren't enough. This just kills compatibility and achieves no real performance features. That's what kills Linux.
Shit won't work unless the user upgrades versions, and big upgrades takes risks and makes the whole thing less compatible.
ok you added "it doesn't crash" now you can remove "it doesn't change".
what good does having gnome and kde 4 years old when there are newer versions that behave the same but with less bugs?
>b-but don't change big number! we have to wait 2 years to check if it works

Because he's autistic
Any distro that even gives you the choice of proprietary software is opposed by him
Just read why he doesn't endorse Debian, pure cringe

>Fedora X version will not change package base versions
That's bullshit. Don't care what their "update policy" says. It's bullshit. The kernel's typically updated the first point-release of a new major kernel. Major versions of MESA's updated regularly. I could go on but it's not that meaningful because if it's news to you it's either because you're not using Fedora or you're not paying attention.

I guess it depends on "regular desktop usage". If you mean install Fedora and use the applications that happened to be installed with your desktop then no, you don't get SELinux problems. Want to use mpd? Or Tor? Share files with Samba? You'll probably have to learn how to configure it. And problems that arise may seem trivial to you because you can solve them quickly, it's not like it's hard to look what the denials are in /var/log/audit/audit.log and allow accordingly IF you know what SELinux is. Not that easy for those who don't.

Attached: neofetch-fc29.jpg (1389x587, 213K)

developers of apps that are supposed to be cross platform are also kind of end users. that want new library features, because they let them develop software faster and provide more features for their end users. they don't use the two year old library version on windows, osx, android and ios, asking them to use it on debian is absurd, so the software won't be ported to linux.

you are right to a certain extend, but compatibility with new library features is required for end users.

Except you'll sounds like a faggot when people ask you what OS you use

> that behave the same
They may look almost the same, bit it doesn't mean their behave identically. For starters, I'd be satisfied if every symbol in stdout would remain the same. Sometimes these changes break userscripts.
> b-but they look the same! Who cares about benefits Linux provides, it's a desktop!

this, they commit the most lines of code to the kernel too.
I'm the same guy that wrote that, and that's why I don't use fedora on my personal laptop. If fyou run dnf with the security option it updates almost everything, because they rebase almost every time there a vulnerability, unless there's an upstream patch for older versions I guess. So it's actually more often the part when they change base versions, that's what I found out on practice. But they won't roll out a new version just because of the keks of new features, that's what a new version of fedora is for.

I agree, defining desktop usage is difficult, but writing the smb.conf is not, if there was a nice gui for sharing files included in gnome, it would probably work well with SELinux, but nobody with enough money to support that seems to be interested in that.

[spoiler] there is [/spoiler]

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-01-08 07-13-49.png (1168x694, 102K)

then tell me how CentOS has gnome 3.28 with Linux 3. fucking 11 and God knows which ancient glibc version.
>but muh extension doesn't work
wow such critical incompatibility retard

>nobody with enough money to supp-
>*red hat blocks your path*

>they somehow NEED fucking new versions of libraries to make something work
one small point: For certain hardware like a newly released/newer GPU like say the RX590 you actually do need new versions of both the kernel and MESA. There will usually be third-party repos for what you need on some distributions but on Debian the entire system is so ancient it's sometimes not possible to build newer versions of what you need.

I fully understand the need and desire to have a Stable(tm) system. Debian is, in my humble opinion, taking it a bit too far. Ancient is a better word for what Debian calls "stable". They should just move the naming-tier. Call current debian unstable testing, call testing stable and current stable should be renamed Debian Ancient. Because that's what it is.

awesome, never used it, does it work without SELinux problems?

well, I have to take the awesome back. because it's webdav and not cifs and the shared folder is fixed.

Well, I assume that's either because:
- it's a maintenance release
- they don't care about compatibility as long as it passes their tests

If Arch didn't work you did something wrong. Blaming the system for your own failures is immature.

Is it easy to configure and use for average person (by average person I mean person who is really not good at PCs and just wants to share files between his family members within his wifi network). If yes, then it does its job enough imo.

Now you understand why I love Ubuntu LTS (default)

literally used arch for 5 years. pacman is still an absolute masterpiece package manager but the distro is managed by people who truly don't care if they break your system with an update. there's currently an issue with the xdg-desktop-portal package causing every gnome application to take 30+ seconds to start, including gdm. they have not fixed this bug for months.

>installer has the least options I've seen in a GUI installer
wtf I hate Ubuntu now

this.
fedora is the most professional yet friendly distro i've ever used, great package support (even better with fusion enabled), stable with little to no crashes(if you want no disappointment, rock solid stability go for centos), good defaults and choice DEs (MATE is peak comfy for me). It is the 'just werks' distro m8.
Shame that more linux beginners are suggested ubuntu, fedora is a pretty solid system for pros and noobs alike.

Attached: it_just_werks.jpg (1366x768, 900K)

>install Fedora
>Debian packages don't work

Attached: 1b8.png (404x266, 182K)

pats op on the back and gives him a lump of sugar

pic related - it is op

Attached: donkey.jpg (490x346, 90K)

This.

I appreciate your work user.

I have used Ubuntu, Debian, OpenSUSE, elementary, Arch, and Fedora is the distro that feels the most polished. I just wish a lot that GNOME didn't suck so bad.

fedora was the first distro i stuck with. it's what i learned linux on

i now use solus

Attached: Screenshot from 2018-12-16 20:21:48.png (1366x768, 101K)

My first distro other than windows was fedora, top comfy but maybe the nostalgia factor is influencing how I look at it

Umm, you guys know you can just disable selinux right?
sudo setenforce 0

Incorrect.

Attached: Captura de tela de 2019-01-08 13-32-16.png (731x608, 159K)

One of Fedora's specialties is fully flicker-free bootup all the way until GDM is started. It even retains the EFI logo display on shutdown. To my knowledge, no other distro does this. But does Fedora also support it when using SDDM?

>install fedora
>its shit
>crashes everywhere
>144hz doesnt work
fuck off linux is DOG SHIT YOU NIGGER

back to /v/

Because Fedora is very strict with what they allow in their repos.
fedoraproject.org/wiki/Forbidden_items?rd=ForbiddenItems
They only make an exception when it comes to firmware, which is the reason why FSF doesn't approve it.

Low quality bait, but here's your (you) you nigger

i used to install it manually from nvidia site on fedora. I also did this for debian stable and it worked.

after some months I always had to reinstall Fedora because of bugs and crashes

It just feels like you can't rely on it for long time, upgrading from version to version could always be more stable too.

Attached: HN.jpg (1000x1000, 126K)

I just wanna say that i used fedora 21 back in the day and it was really nice, but dnf was pretty slow compared to apt or pacman, and the list of officially supported packages was really small (which is pretty important on a binary based distro imho). Other than that it had one of the most sensible gnome defaults.
I also think it fucked up my windows dual boot mbr 'activation' every time i tried it.

based

apt is literally supported and you can install it and use .deb packages
fedoraproject.org/wiki/Tools/Apt

fuck me , it uses rpm. you can convert debs to rpm though.

Been using fedora all the way from f14 I believe and it's really the best, ty for your work

GREAT!
NOW GET RID OF GNOME AND INSTALL KDE

Why would he do it? GNOME is better than KDE imo at this moment of time.
ty, what part are you working on?

If I wouldn't be using Gentoo and would want an "easy out of the box distro" it would be fedora.

There is one thing that makes me feel cucked about fedora though, being a tester for RH

>GNOME is better than KDE imo at this moment of time.
How can you stand that fat top bar?

Why's that a problem?

Use a theme with a smaller bar.
Use Debian if you want 10 year old packages.

>10 year old packages

Objectively wrong

I feel used, wish my school made me use CentOS instead

good point