PDA

View Full Version : Fedora 11 Reached EOL - Paul Frields



bob
25th June 2010, 11:38 PM
This announcement is a reminder that as of 2010-06-25, Fedora 11 has
reached its end of life for updates. As planned, last update pushes
to Fedora 11 were made in advance[1] of this date. No further
updates, including security updates, will be available for Fedora 11.

Fedora 12 will continue to receive updates until approximately one
month after the release of Fedora 14. The maintenance schedule of
Fedora releases is documented on the Fedora Project wiki.

**Just an aside, but threads dealing with F11 will now be posted in EOL rather than the regular Forums. - Bob

Dan
26th June 2010, 01:36 AM
YESSSS!

No more auto-break updates! <..:eek:..>


<..:D..>

tox
26th June 2010, 02:28 AM
now you can install F12 an have fun there fixing it Dan :)

bob
26th June 2010, 03:00 AM
Skip all that and really Go For Broke with Rawhide. Breakage is easy and often. Fixing's less so.

Dan
26th June 2010, 04:19 AM
Maybe not all the way to Rawhide, but I'll be skipping F12 entirely. I'm not saying it was a dog of a release, but it did remind me a lot of F9 ... without the eventual redemption of basic -- useful -- functionality. <..:eek:..>

I've still got an RHEL6 Beta partition on this drive, but without the updates, and/or a decently populated set of repos, it's damn near as useful as lugnuts on a birthday cake.

I'm eyeing it for F13, though. Once Leigh declares Goddard too damn boring to mess with, it should be just about right for us normal folks. <..:D..>

hephasteus
26th June 2010, 08:34 PM
Maybe not all the way to Rawhide, but I'll be skipping F12 entirely. I'm not saying it was a dog of a release, but it did remind me a lot of F9 ... without the eventual redemption of basic -- useful -- functionality. <..:eek:..>

I've still got an RHEL6 Beta partition on this drive, but without the updates, and/or a decently populated set of repos, it's damn near as useful as lugnuts on a birthday cake.

I'm eyeing it for F13, though. Once Leigh declares Goddard too damn boring to mess with, it should be just about right for us normal folks. <..:D..>

RHEL6 is basically fedora 12 cleaned up quite a bit and likely to get the entire kitchen sink backported into it.

assen
27th June 2010, 05:45 PM
Hi,

Speaking of upgrades from F11, I'd say the contrary - stay with F12 as it was more stable and polished than F13 currently (as of today) is.

WWell,

Piscium
29th June 2010, 01:06 AM
Hi,

Speaking of upgrades from F11, I'd say the contrary - stay with F12 as it was more stable and polished than F13 currently (as of today) is.

WWell,

+1

I started using F12 about one month after release and found almost no issues.

It is now a month since F13 has been released and I have had and still have many issues. I have now increased the ABRT disk space from 1 GByte to 5, as the default 1 GByte was full - yes, I know I can delete reports, but I have plenty of disk space so I want to see how far it goes.

Up to now I have really not minded the F13 issues as Linux is a (recent) hobby, and so I can learn with them. And I still have my F12 partitions so I can easily go back to them if I so decide.

Anyway, historically and in many cultures, 12 is considered a perfect number. It is not by accident that there are 12 months in a year, 360 degrees in a circle, and so on.

And in the west 13 is an unlucky number, so F13... ;)

dd_wizard
29th June 2010, 01:14 AM
I've always considered 13 to be a lucky number, but my subconscious may know better. I missed the repo transition when F13 forked from rawhide development and was two weeks into Rawhide before I noticed. I actually managed to downgrade back to F13. When it went gold,it wasn't nearly as exciting as rawhide... So I decided to pretty much skip F13. :D

dd_wizard

user f11
5th July 2010, 07:10 AM
Hi,
RE: A little bit history
When I were on F10 my computer was much faster (and less reliable maybe), then I went onto f11 and it became more reliable and a little bit slower (I can prove this with tests).
Them I decided to go to f12 and I didn't succeed to do it at all (several different trials).

My question is: who is going to convince me to go to f14 'next millenium plus' as my current machine has excellent performance (on www.usdebtclock.org it is outperforming XP machine of the same class (the speed of displaying, I mean)) and rich functionality.

Regards

CSchwangler
5th July 2010, 07:21 AM
If you are more into stability than bleeding edge and like to stay longer on one particular version, Fedora may not be the right thing for you. I would suggest CentOS or Scientific Linux, if you want to stay in the Red Hat area. Both are based on Red Hat Linux, which is in itself based on Fedora, but lags several versions behind.


My question is: who is going to convince me to go to f14 'next millenium plus' as my current machine has excellent performance

I guess no one will convince you. Its just that Fedora releases have a relatively small time window in which they are supported. After they have been EOL'ed, they lack updates and therefore it is a security risk to further use them.

errorxp
5th July 2010, 08:15 AM
On my machine there is notable performance difference when running F11 compared to F13. I've had a lot of stability issues with F12 and F13 (javascript making it crash every now and then). Looks like I'm keeping F11 as my primary OS.

user f11
5th July 2010, 09:40 AM
Hi,
Nothing personal, but the idea was chotto chigao ('a little bit different').
In my view the development of an OS is very much like the development of any OS or software in the general case. The problem is reduced to the solution of the math optimisation problem:
speed = max
functionality = max
reliability = max
compatibility = max
acquiring new skills = min
risk of changes = min
security = max

When developing something new the key issue is: is it better than the old one?!

A definition of 'better' should be done, in other words weight factors to the optimisation parameters are to be assigned (resolving contradictions of the kind: 'how much of functionality we are ready to gain at the expense of speed', 'how much of speed we are ready to have at the expense of security of the system' and so on).

Until something of the kind is done there is no guarantee that the bigger digit in the linix distro is a guarantee of a 'better' version.

Regards

CSchwangler
5th July 2010, 06:09 PM
I disagree. There are many more targets for a Linux distro than you are listing. Fedora, for example, happens to be a playground for new technologies, which may or may not be used in RHEL. With respect to that, reliability, compatibility and speed happen to be less important. Trying new technologies and eliminating bugs (for example, new kernels or ext4 file system) are way more important.

user f11
6th July 2010, 05:12 AM
I disagree. There are many more targets for a Linux distro than you are listing. Fedora, for example, happens to be a playground for new technologies, which may or may not be used in RHEL. With respect to that, reliability, compatibility and speed happen to be less important. Trying new technologies and eliminating bugs (for example, new kernels or ext4 file system) are way more important.
Hi,
This 'trying new technologies and eliminating bugs' sounds to me as 'thinking within itself' and like 'technology for the sake of technological development'.
In the system Man-Machine it is not the machine which is to be in the focus, but rather the Man (I mean on the user side). The machine should be in service of the Man, rather than the Man to be enslaved by the technological experiments and bug reports.
We all know what 'banking for the sake of money' could lead us to. It is interesting to see where 'technology for the sake of technology' would bring us.
Everything is a matter of point of view. Anyway.
Regards.

---------- Post added 2010-07-06 at 07:12 AM CDT ---------- Previous post was 2010-07-05 at 10:36 PM CDT ----------


If you are more into stability than bleeding edge and like to stay longer on one particular version, Fedora may not be the right thing for you. I would suggest CentOS or Scientific Linux, if you want to stay in the Red Hat area. Both are based on Red Hat Linux, which is in itself based on Fedora, but lags several versions behind.



I guess no one will convince you. Its just that Fedora releases have a relatively small time window in which they are supported. After they have been EOL'ed, they lack updates and therefore it is a security risk to further use them.

BTW, if you think that F14 is the 'bleeding edge' of computing - this 'edge' is a little bit further. You may take a look at this video, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNatzhe4BoQ&feature=related

Dan
6th July 2010, 05:31 AM
I suspect they could make a quantum leap in their budget efficiency by upgrading a few of their stone knives and bearskin rugs.

There were enough CRTS in that video to chew a bug hole in the bottom line with the power bills alone.

<..:p..>

CSchwangler
6th July 2010, 07:23 AM
BTW, if you think that F14 is the 'bleeding edge' of computing - this 'edge' is a little bit further. You may take a look at this video, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNatz...eature=related

We have been talking about Fedora and Linux, not about some technology that may become available in a couple of years. Furthermore, this will at least hurt three of the optimization parameters postulated: reliability = max, risk of changes = min and compatibility = max. You don't think this will be stable when it becomes available, do you?


This 'trying new technologies and eliminating bugs' sounds to me as 'thinking within itself' and like 'technology for the sake of technological development'.

If you don't like the direction of Fedora, why don't you become part of the project and try to change the goals? This is open source and the Fedora project makes it really easy to become a part of it.

bob
6th July 2010, 11:49 AM
Guys, this thread is about the notification that F11's at EOL. We're getting far afield of that right now.

tox
6th July 2010, 12:36 PM
might wanna close it bob -delete my post if needed-