Thursday, November 10, 2011

My Fedora 16 fiasco

I was very much looking forward to testing Fedora 16, to finding out about its latest new features and enhancements, so I downloaded the ISO images for both GNOME 3.2 and KDE 4.7 and on I went to test. I was so confident that both would be so great that I decided to wipe out Mandriva from one of my machines to make room for Verne. Unfortunately, my experience was short lived and a bit of a disaster.

To test and install Verne, I decided to use my HP 2730p and 2740p tablets. Specifically, I wanted to install both on the latter, being a model that´s usually demanding and difficult in terms of hardware recognition. That would also allow me to compare how KDE and GNOME squeeze the latest from Fedora camp following an accurate approach. My plan was also to install the KDE flavor on the former, given that I like Fedora better than Mandriva myself. Unfortunately, I was not able to get anything working.

On the 2740p, both the GNOME and KDE Live desktops would load perfectly and smoothly (albeit without support for the on board Broadcom Wireless card, a disappointment, I have to admit), so on I went with the installation. I used all standard steps, nothing fancy, choosing to use the full internal drive in both cases. I got identical results: an apparently good and complete installation that wouldn´t boot. In fact, it rendered my hard drive useless, for I was getting your typical "non-system drive found..." error. Because it happened in both cases, I started to worry that my drive was indeed broken, but after a quick Kubuntu installation, everything was working fine, so the conclusion is that both Fedora flavors were failing on me miserably.

On the 2730p, the error was even more interesting. Both GNOME and KDE Live desktops would load, but with a very weird and persistent screen flicker that would not go away. First time I had seen anything like that happening on a machine that has proven its worth with Linux, successfully running Fedora 14 and 15 in the past. Thinking that the problem could be down to the Live Desktop and hoping it would go away after the installation took place, I decided to go on anyways, but in both cases the installer would crash when completing the post-installation steps... Argh!!!

Here's a video of the terrible screen flickering:



Now, here's the crash (apologies, the quality is not that great!):



So there you have it, no Fedora fun for me. This is particularly disappointing because I am using machines that ran previous versions of Fedora smoothly. There may be a remote chance that it is all down to the ISO files I downloaded being corrupt, but I doubt it (EDIT: Indeed, it has nothing to do with the quality of the ISOs). I will download them again and give it another go anyways (EDIT: I did and didn't work), but I don´t keep much hope that I will be able to enjoy Fedora 16 any time soon (EDIT: Sounds about right, unfortunately).

How was your experience? Did you encounter any installation problems?

56 comments:

  1. Instead of redownloading why not just check the md5sum? Thats what such a thing was intended for.

    If you are looking for something new to play with you should find time to take a peek at Bodhi Linux ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry to read that Fedora 16 came with such problems.

    For me (quite old Toshiba laptop with ATI x700 graphic card) it works very nice although I also have some screen artifacts (when starting Shell, but when its all started - everything is OK again. Except for Suspend - when I wake Fedora from this - screen is flickering with artifacts so much - I can't even see wallpaper or cursor. Not so big problem because I just dont use Suspend option).

    I was using Ubuntu - for personal use and work - exclusively from version 8.04 (without any other OS). Unfortunately Ubuntu 11.04 wasn't good for me because of Unity. So I tried Debian, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Arch (too complicated to even install), Mint (which was great (ver. 10) except it logouts randomly without any warning - ver. 11) . Then Ubuntu 11.10 with better Unity (sadly so slow for me) and really nice and responsive Shell (at the beginning, because later it started to eat so much of my ram that 1gb that I have was always full + about 400-500 mb of swap).

    So I had to switch. I tried Debian (hello it's 2011 and I have to add my wireless driver for Intel 2200gb during install by hand and even with that it can't find my WPA wireless network? Ubuntu had that looong time ago).
    So tried Lubuntu 11.10 (which is OK except PDF printing problem and some other minor problems).

    Only solution was to wait for Mint 12 (but I'm not sure about that new ideas of "merging" Gnome 3 with panel at the bottom).

    And then... Surprise... Fedora 16! And wow - it's really fast (for my old notebook). Takes 300-400 mb of ram (sometimes 600mb with Chome (which btw. is big ram eater). Shell looks great (I love Gnome panels and thought that can't change it for something so unproductive like Unity or Gnome Shell. But... Shell is great - so elegant and responsive and quite productive).

    Now problems that I have:
    - Shell: too few configuration options!
    - Fedora 16: ugly fonts rendering (I changed that with some howtos to look like Ubuntu, but still I think it should be better ootb. For me Ubuntu's rendering is best by far (compared to Debian, Fedora). Mint's fonts look great also.
    - Fedora 16: I don't like Package Manager and for me apt and debs are just amazing (with Synaptic, not Software Center). I installed Yum Extender but it's much worse than Synaptic.

    Sorry for so big comment and for my english. Just felt that I need to share it :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Continue sticking with 10.10 at least it works well. :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Fedora16 has been just fair for me as well. The included nvidia drivers only work with one screen and following the akmod install instructions borked the install. I also had no sucess logging in with my regular user name. Recreating the user resulted in an unable to write tmp error. How Fedora manages to get so many small things right and present a few show stopping glaring errors every stinking release infuriates me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just finished installing Fedora 16 from my SD card. It went smoothly -- their new installer is the best I've used. I blew away my Ubuntu 11.10 setup with no regrets.

    No problems at all. I still haven't installed my favorite apps which aren't in the repos. I often struggle with installing software as much (or more so) than doing the full OS installation.

    I've been using a partitioned 250 GB hard drive for over a year in a triple-boot setup. So far, so good.

    To install a Linux distro I specify one small partition (primary) for /boot and one larger partition (on the extended partition) for /. My HD has three small boot partitions and one large extended partition which is sub-divided. Each distro has its own boot partition and '/' partition. I never do a "side by side" installation. I reformat the partitions when I install (ext2 for boot, ext4 for /). Of course, I leave the others intact.

    My boot manager setup is a bit weird: "plop bootloader" goes in the MBR. Whatever bootloader the distro wants to install is placed (when possible) into the /boot partition's boot sectors. Sometimes an installer won't cooperate and I'll have to manually reinstall one or both. I pass through two bootloaders on the way to my desktop.

    Ubuntu 11.10 messed up my boot loader and also didn't correct the monitor underscan caused by my video card. Fedora 15/16 did both those tasks correctly. I'm a happy camper.

    Fedora seems to be better suited to my AMD video hardware than does Ubuntu. My system: Athlon X2 BE-2400 on Foxconn mainboard with AMD RS780 built-in video. 2GB RAM.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi,

    I've installed Fedora 16 without issues, but partitioning the disks by hand (I use LVM2 over LUKS and I prefer cmd-line over a GUI for doing the partitioning). From what I understand, Fedora will now try to use GPT by default. Maybe if you stick with a standard MBR and standard partitions your systems will boot.

    Hope this helps.

    Ionutz

    ReplyDelete
  7. Got great success on a Dell Vostro desktop & one Acer Aspire. Haven't tested the KDE version yet, but I'm happy so far. The stuff Fedora packages under the hood is quite amazing (I'm particularly excited about systemd, hekafs and the newer virt stack). Gnome3 is not that bad either.
    This is the kind of innovation that you simply don't see in other distributions or even operating systems.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am very eager to upgrade to fc16. But then im still having second thoughts while my fc15 64bit runs very fine on Gnome 3. If i would only benefit on having Gnome 3.2 with minimal changes from version 3, i would rather stick with fc15. I'll be waiting for further more updates using fc15 and maybe upgrade to Gnome 3.2 if there would be an auto update soon.

    Btw, I downloaded the DVD ISO and the Live CD, using the DVD ISO, i encounter error saying "..insufficient disk space the installer will now reboot..." I tested it on running vmware player and on my lenovo G470, i got the same error on both.

    I tried the Live CD, it runs fine and what i see is what i have on my fc15, so it gives me dull interest to upgrade. I am more of a Gnome user, haven't tried the KDE version yet, maybe in awhile if i have much time.

    This is a nice blog you have. :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks all for your comments!

    @Jeff: I did check md5, no problems there, but even if I hadn't, don't you think the fact that both KDE and GNOME ISOs behave in the same way in the same machine but differently on another machine is more than just ISO checksum integration gone bad? What I mean by downloading again is that perhaps those ISOs were bad, but like I said I don't keep much hope.

    As for Bodhi, I have tested the latest two releases you have put out, but unfortunately, I don't like Enlightenment at all. I even started a review, but I decided to discard it because I was too biased by my disliking of the DE. In any case, I can tell you I was having the same issues with Midori, which couldn't even display my blog contents correctly (!), skipping new lines and showing my articles as a big single paragraph.

    Firefox is roughly 30MB in size and with its late updates and improvements, it is simply leaps and bounds better than Midori. My recommendation is that you get a real browser in there and forget about that piece of Alpha software.

    Thanks again everybody for your feedback and tips!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Updated the post with a couple videos I quickly recorded today on my second attempt to install Fedora. This time around I concentrated on the 2730p, but same tragic end.

    I downloaded both ISOs again, this time using a torrent client and created liveUSBs using a different USB drive.

    As you can see from the videos, the screen flickering is pretty bad (first time I have seen something like that since I started using Linux), and then, the installation simply crashes (the same one that finishes OK on my 2740p).

    I don't know, I am a bit confused that nobody else seems to be encountering issues, but it is frustrating that this new release is not capable of running on hardware the last two releases were.

    Oh, well...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hi Chema,
    I can understand your disappointment and frustration as you were highly enthused about the Fedora 16 release. Hope you find someway to get them to work. Also I have created a new blog "My Thoughts on Linux, FOSS and Life" and the first post is "Liberate Yourself". If you have the time please check it here http://mknadeem.blogspot.com/ . Would love to have your views.
    Take Care.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hey buddy

    Way to go with that first entry!... Very informative, but perhaps there was material there for two articles? I guess that's very much a personal thing, but I have the feeling I may be losing readers along the way when I type too much, hehehe...

    Btw, wonder where that blog of yours found that look and feel! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Chema Thanks Brother for checking it.I have used the Picture Window Template for my previous blog also but with the default setup. But this time around I changed the background and it is the one which we share that I found best looking, also I took some ques from your page widths as I found that made my blog look much better(after all you have got the artistic sense). I also felt that the article could have been in two parts,1)About GNU/Linux and 2)About Ubuntu but I wanted my first post to have everything that a new user may be up and running and didn't have to look anywhere else.
    Thanks once again :-)

    ReplyDelete
  14. i suggest to try dvd version of fedora, and install both gnome and kde.. i've always had problem with live images, mostly localization, but also some annoyn issues with past releases, and fo 16 i've got dvd from start, and i've two perfect installation on both desktop and notebook, intel and ati hardware worked without issues.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thanks Enrico, I guess it's my only option left. Will give it a go eventually.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hello there.

    I had the same issue with F16 not booting at all or even finding the disk. But I can confirm what Ionutz Borcoman said about using mbr. I ended up doing just that on my laptop after trying everything you did and more for two days;-) I use "ubuntu style" partitioning with one root partition and one for swap, and now my system boots nicely into grub 1.99. I think it may have something to do with my bios having an issue with gpt partitioning and since flashing it on linux (Toshiba provides only .exe files now) is a pain, I opted to just get a litte behind the times;-) I advice you to try this.

    On a side note, marcjan007, you have to install drivers manually in Debian because of their free software guidelines, not because of them being behind the times, although stable is, by design:-)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks Hrafnkell

    I have downloaded the DVD ISO and I get the same issues. The terrible screen flickering is very much there, with the difference that the DVD actually manages to complete the installation successfully.

    Well, successfully is not really true. It ends, and when I boot, I have the same issue that my main drive is not found.

    I appreciate the suggestions about MBR, but in all honesty, I can't be bothered. This is Fedora we are talking about, not a low-profile distro, and it's almost 2012. Come on, are Fedora developers really expecting that standard users are going to know what an MBR is, much less know how to tweak it? This is surreal!

    ReplyDelete
  18. You are exactly right, and this is why, although I love Fedora, I would never, ever, recommend it to a non-nerd. It may look, smell and feel like it's user-friendly, but there are always quirks that can lead to an unusable system. But on the other hand, we need bleeding edge distros as well to lead the way. And for those who can't be bothered, there's Mint.

    This particular problem, I believe is exactly due to Fedora being bleeding edge and some bioses not being. I tried installing the latest Sabayon and had the same issue. But, in case there's somebody out there who want's to ignore our warnings and go for it, the fix is unbelievably sipmle:

    1. Install something like Linux Mint or Ubuntu, use the default settings.
    2. Install Fedora 16 from dvd or cd, and choose to manually edit partitions.
    3. Just use the two partitions Mint created, and assign them to / and swap. Format them as such. Forget about encryption and lvm unless you need it.
    4. Continue with installation and go on with your life:-)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hmmm... To be blatantly honest, this is not bleeding edge, this is bleeding stupid... To implement something like this without a fallback mode of some kind?

    To be innovative is one thing, but it does not make sense to go with something that will give many of your users a headache as the default implementation...

    Why are they keeping BTRFS as optional for so long then? In that case I think they are using common sense, not this time. Is it really that hard to build something up on the installer that would recognize if the BIOS is modern enough to support this feature before it is applied?

    And btw, my HP 2740p was release March last year... How bleeding edge do they want to be that a machine that new is already out of their game?

    ReplyDelete
  20. ...but at least the steps I described should work. Another example of non-user-friendliness is the default option of lvm without even explaining it briefly in the installer. I would not expect new users to know what lvm is, let alone how it affects working with your hard drives.

    ReplyDelete
  21. am afraid I got to disagree. If HP is not supporting hardware in future (they have discontinued production already), Fedora is right to withhold support for HP. I installed it in my old IBM computer with 128 (AGP) Nvidia Graphic card and unlike previous Fedora amazingly fast and sleek.
    I pity for the guys who bought HP. Even in this small island Ceylon university entrants were forced to buy HP (not giving these information beforehand was a bad business practice) by a politician with some hidden agenda. I now go and say do not buy HP except their Cloud Service.
    I should blame HP not Fedora who is doing a wonderful job.

    ReplyDelete
  22. They can't test every possible piece of hardware out there. File a bug and say your system is experiencing these issues, probably link to this blog so they can see the videos, and then move on.

    These sort of things happen. Whenever you change software it has the chance to introduce bugs. It is just the nature of the beast.

    You don't seem to be able to figure it out and they can't fix problems that they don't know exist.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Thanks for your comments!

    nater, I don't think it is about testing every piece of hardware out there, it's about the certainty (which they surely had) that many old BIOS out there would struggle to support this feature. As such, they should have come up with a workaround for those (MANY!) users, instead of stuffing this new feature down their throats.

    It is NOT the nature of the beast. I hate the self complacent attitude so many open source users take, willing to simply accept any decision, regardless of how bad it is. The GNOME team have worked hard to provide automatic detection of hardware which provides a fallback mode if GNOME Shell is not supported by the hardware. KDE offers similar features when it comes to desktop effects, and so does Unity. In fact, KDE learned from their "big bang" approach to KDE 4 and have decided to provide KDE 4.x and KDE 5 in parallel. They learned that forcing users to jump off the cliff is not the best approach.

    There are tons of examples of situations like this one in Linux World which have been managed correctly, so let's not just accept this because Fedora did it. We are Linux users, even fans, but precisely because of that we should be the first to stop pretending EVERYTHING goes, because if we keep doing so, Linux will never get to the level of quality it deserves.

    Asoka, I can tell you have little or no enterprise experience if you speak like that. I work for a major corporation and we are still on Windows XP. EXTREME reliability is what companies look for, and it is plain stupid to expect millions of users out there who have a long term contract with HP (which btw has NOT discontinued production, not sure where you got that from) to say "oh, well, let's just throw our contracts away and start over because... well, because Fedora said so!". Similarly, it is unacceptable that users which bought their computers in 2010 are left aside. If it is a feature meant for future hardware it should NEVER come as a default option, that's just common sense.

    Anyways, don't mean for this to become a big discussion here. Just wanted to share my thoughts, which I did, so enough of me already!

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  24. Is user experience given priority in Fedora?

    No, never has and never will.

    The Fedora project is about innovation, the advancement of FOSS and being the first to try things that may not function well.

    You should always bear in mind what any Linux project aims to achieve before making statements as you may inadvertently make a statement that is contrary to the project goals.

    For example,

    "This is Fedora we are talking about, not a low-profile distro, and it's almost 2012. Come on, are Fedora developers really expecting that standard users are going to know what an MBR is, much less know how to tweak it? This is surreal..."

    Fedora doesnt aim to please the standard user.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I never speak for a company or corporation. I agree with you in that context. I speak only for the users, using old and new computers. In this part of the world most of the users, use pirated copies and they are reluctant accept Linux.
    I try my best to promote Linux and not making a headway still.
    The type of remarks you make kills the Linux philosophy.

    I have tested over Linux 200 distributions ( I use about 10 computers and a laptop- no netbook used in for testing) over the past one year and I have not found a single distribution that satisfy all my needs. When I find a problem I immediately report it and I am glad to say unlike Windows, the Linux developers find a solution within three months. They never disappoint me in finding a solution. I have many examples but no need for me to elaborate. In your case you should have done the same thing and just wait for three months and you would have found a solution.
    That is what a corporate person do. I have work with corporate clients in the past and that is what i used to do when problem is detected.
    There is nothing Linux cannot solve unlike windows.
    In scientific sense scathing generalization is very bad. that is what you are doing. Please do not take it personally but I have seen this often with many others doing the same.
    I have already published 3 books (digital and print) and one on Cloud computing with user in mind. I have addressed some of the issues you have raised in my books. Just Type Dr. Asoka (I do not like to use this medical term in the web) at Amazon's books, you will get to the books which include other fields. Computing is not my major it is my hobby.

    Update on Genome Live just posted at parafox.
    Unlike Ubuntu's Unity, Fedora Unity Desktop (I think it is Unity-I may be wrong) is amazingly beautiful an new desktop experience.
    They have iron out the problem with Workplaces are placed on the right hand side for easy manipulation for right handed guy/girl.
    Its application arrangement is good unlike in Ubuntu Unity, which is both Applications and Software management.
    We have to get used to this new desktop and give them constructive criticism.
    I love the new experience in my old age and have to go through with the learning curve like a kid which invigorate me and make me feel young.
    It has a nice introduction and help page, too.
    As regard to HP, the information is coming from Tech-Republic and not my own.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I said what I wanted to say already, but I want to respond to some wrong assumptions that are being made here.

    KDE developers recently conducted a survey to better understand whether their user base would be OK with moving the locking screen to Kwin, which would result in incompatibility of the very old screensavers that are currently available in KDE. THAT right there is trying to please users. A feature that is purely cosmetic, whose removal would have absolutely no impact in functionality or reliability may still be something some users cherish, so they asked about it. Way to go, KDE!

    We are not talking here about fancier window decorations, a nicer icon theme or improved font rendering, not even better help or documentation. We are talking about something that renders a number of user's machines out there useless upon installation of Fedora 16. If providing a workaround for that critical problem is "pleasing users" to you, we clearly have different understanding of that term.

    Now, I guess you assume I ignore Fedora's aim (or mission, as they call it), but that's not right. Of course, I know where you are coming from, for Fedora aims to be innovative and recognizes that it is not its aim to provide long-term stability. However, that's far from implying they will provide unstable software just for the sake of being cutting edge. From one of their foundations:

    "First represents our commitment to innovation. We are not content to let others do all the heavy lifting on our behalf; we provide the latest in stable and robust, useful, and powerful free software in our Fedora distribution."

    Now, keeping this in mind, let's talk about "stable, robust, useful and powerful" when users with this problem can't even boot their machines.

    Since Fedora 12, I have always been able to install and run it successfully, at least a big majority of its features. In my experience, Fedora was always robust and reliable, even if incorporating new, innovative and sometimes risky features. Cutting edge AND rock solid have always been part of in Fedora in the past, so I have no reason to simply accept Fedora can stop booting for no particular reason as part of the "project aim".

    ReplyDelete
  27. Chem - You should really read the docs provided with a distribution.

    Our Quick Start guide details why we stick with Midori by default.

    Firefox and Chromium are both only 3 clicks away ;)

    ReplyDelete
  28. @Jeff: Buddy, you explained the rationale behind choosing Midori yourself in a post here not that long ago. In fact, after reading that Quickstart guide, it says about the same you said.

    Having said so, do you really think your average Joe will care enough to get to the Bodhi website, read the developers´ rationale for including Midori by default and forget his frustrations just like that? Doesn´t sound like a reasonable expectation to me.

    In my opinion, an Internet browser is now more critical than ever before, for it handles a big percentage of the activities users do on daily basis. Prioritizing weight over functionality and reliability... Well, let´s just say I respect your choice but I don´t agree with it, and I think many people may simply decide to disregard your distro after being frustrated with Midori.

    Technically speaking, yes, Firefox may be 3 clicks away, but it´s not as easy as that. For someone coming from another distribution, it may not be as straight forward to understand how Bodhi works (I personally had to play around a bit until I felt comfortable with your take on installation).

    It´s just a matter of priorities, I guess. Personally, I think it´s almost 2012, most people have connections that can quickly download your roughly less than 400 MB ISO in a breeze, and it would be no different if Firefox was there by default. Download time is, therefore, not a factor here... Unless you are thinking about people with extremely slow connections, for whom your distro would not be that good a deal anyways. They would probably be better off aiming at something like Puppy Linux and its 121MB.

    Start times in Firefox are VERY quick now, certainly not slower than Midori´s, and its memory management has come a long way in version 8. Browsing is faster as well (in my experience, faster than Midori´s), plus it includes many features Midori does not, like synchronization, a much wider array of extensions, higher compatibility with the latest Internet standards, etc.

    Long story short: I know why you decided to include Midori, but I keep thinking it is the wrong choice. Just trying to pass some constructive feedback here, please don´t consider this harsh criticism.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  29. Salem
    I instaled Fedora 16 without any problem ,manually partition , set home, root , swap partition
    and all goes great, in spite it needed some tweak but I think like any other distro not big thinks at all , fonts, thems, icons on desktop...; I just move from ubuntu , tried mint and mint debian edition.
    may be small point is about slow mirrors but we can deal with

    ReplyDelete
  30. @jeff Brother I agree with Chema on this one. Midori is just the worst browser out there that is being shipped with a distro.
    Also about the Enlightenment DE. It is kinda fun when you first try it, customise it and all that fun stuff but when that part it is over and you look at the rough edges, no smoothness(every thing is like drawn with a ruler) the serious lack of polish in comparison to other DEs out there. It is left gasping.
    And an average users who is coming from the Windows/MacOS background, I have to say will find it ugly.
    Sorry Jeff because I know you are a great fan of E17 but some serious work is needed to bring it upto scale.
    Take Care Brother.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Hi, in my experience with Fedora 13 and 15... i downloaded the isos with perfect sha256sum match and BOTH get me to a hang on install. In both cases using DVD and CDs isos... perfetly burned too. I still dont know WHY but to present day i sticked to a very old Fedora 12 installation but fuctional.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Enlightenment looks are one big fail for me as well. It´s not just how menus look and all that, which after all is very much subjective, but also the fact that GTK apps look completely out of place when compared to Enlightenment native ones.

    I am a huge fan of the work KDE has put in place to make all apps, QT and GTK alike, look as native as possible in KDE. This offers a very consistent and professional feel that I love. In fact, GNOME is going through inconsistencies as well as some of its apps are still not migrated to GNOME3, and it sucks... even if those inconsistencies are much less than the ones we see in Enlightenment.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I experienced exactly the same result (screen flicker) on my 2730 with Fedora 16. I believe the problem is in the Intel video driver in the new 3.1.0 kernel, as it also happened when I updated the kernel in Arch Linux from 3.0.7 to 3.1.0 on the same machine. I'm quite sure F16 uses the 3.1.0 kernel at install, but I noticed that the 3.1.1 is now available as an update. I haven't tried it yet, but I'm hopeful.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I have never used Fedora before but have heard much good about it. I usually us Ubuntu and/or Debian Lenny or Sarge. Fedora 16 was a massive disappointment. First, Gnome 3 would not load from the live CD. Undaunted, I installed to HD anyway. On reboot, no login screen but I could get a picture of it by hitting Print Screen. Finally did CTRL-ALT-F2 and added a normal user. Then startx. Got something that was probably part of Gnome 2 but no panels, no launchers ... nothing but the desktop background. Also during install to HD, I had no opportunity to select packages and it installed the bootloader without asking. I installed QGIS but it would not display.
    After a while, I could not even Alt-F2 to get an apps list which meant that neither could I use a terminal to try installing a more suitable desktop.
    In the end, Fedora 16 was only useful to provide a boot menu so that I could get into my Ubuntu install, delete the Fedora 16 partition and reinstall Grub2.
    Fedora 16 was a complete waste of time for me. To make matters worse, forum support seems pretty shaky.
    -Dennis

    ReplyDelete
  35. Thanks Dr Dynamics!

    I may go back to Fedora 16 in some time, but I am very interested in your testing with Kernel 3.1.1. Please share your findings!

    ReplyDelete
  36. I love that you both are saying E is "ugly". There in we see how truly subjective appearance is, a good deal of people believe E is the best looking desktop out there.

    As for "seamlessness" that is also the user's choice. Here is a screenshot with GTK, EFL and QT applications running - http://www.enlightenment.org/ss/e-4e828279efec81.14406512.png

    They all look pretty much the same.

    Last comment here as you obviously miss our ideal of user choice. From what you have said you want the distro you download to make all your choices for you - and thats fine, but it is not what we are about.

    ~Jeff

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hey Jeff.

    I did mention looks are subjective, I was talking about integration, and your screenshot does not prove me wrong. In fact, it is a bit of a cheating example, if I may say so.

    Yes, I talked about GTK apps and QT apps, but it was kinda obvious I was implying KDE and GNOME apps. Showing VLC (which has its own interface that looks out of place on ALL Linux DEs) and Firefox (which also has a bit of a quirky interface) is a bit misleading, to be honest. The real deal would to install something like Amarok, Digikam, Evolution or F-spot, and see how those buttons and menus look completely out of place in Enlightenment.

    Btw, your screenshot is an example of a highly customized Enlightenment desktop, nothing like the default look and feel users can find in Bodhi right after they install. That default look and feel is what I was talking about, not a customization that hides differences.

    About what you say last... I am not sure I understand, to be honest. All distros decide their standards, and all distros allow users to change them and make them personal after the initial install. How´s Bodhi different? Are you not choosing Midori? Are you not choosing Enlightenment? Are you not choosing how installation is managed, how the splash and login screens look like? How about choosing to stick to Ubuntu 10.04 and go with a semi-rolling approach? Aren´t those choices yours?

    Invariably, building a distro means the distro builder will make choices that the distro users have to live with. Some of those choices can be changed, some cannot, so yeah, defaults are important. Bodhi is exactly the same as any other distro in that regard.

    In fact, I am not sure I would understand creating a distro with an ideal target user in mind who will change everything once the installation is over. It would be different if we were talking about one of those "minimal" distros, where you would be providing a bare-bones enlightenment desktop specifically designed for users to build on, but that´s not the case here.

    I don´t know, I am not sure I follow your rationale. It´s great that you target advanced users who will have no problem modifying default settings, but I don´t see how that "justifies" default choices that are not up to standards (going back to Midori here).

    Anyhow, enough with the criticism. Despite the fact that I dislike some things about Bodhi, I believe the effort you guys are putting in place is admirable, and considering how young your distro is, I find it works well. Undoubtedly, E17 is VERY fast, so that must be a big plus for users seeking that, plus, like you said, it will be an awesome choice for Enlightenment fans. Last but not least, my jaw hit the floor when I saw that gorgeous splash screen you guys have, it must be the most beautiful Plymouth creation I have seen to date.

    So yeah, please keep up your great work. I just wish you consider some of my feedback at some point.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  38. I had a chance to try out the 3.1.1 kernel (Arch has also updated to 3.1.1), and the result is still the same, despite the indications I've seen that there were some more improvements to the Intel video drivers. So no Fedora 16 for now.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The screenshot Jeff links looks an awful lot like a default laptop profile setup with the detourious theme. I admit the detourious theme is not installed fresh out of the box, but the profile is. A few clicks and a fresh bodhi system could look very much like the screenshot Jeff posted. As much as Jeff likes detourious, I would not be surprised if it is one of the default themes in Bodhi 1.2.3.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hi,

    I have a HP 2730p too. I can confirm the problem with flickering display on Fedora 16. Earlier version was ok.

    /G

    ReplyDelete
  41. Thanks all for your comments!

    Dr Dynamics, I will use my 2740 at some point, which strangely enough, did not get any flickering. Must be that Intel HD cards use a different driver?

    Tristam, that's OK, maybe it's not that customized, but that's a minor thing, for that theme only adds a bit of make up. The truth of the matter is that GNOME and KDE apps look out of place in general, and I don't see that changing any time soon (as opposed to KDE, for instance, which is constantly improving how GNOME apps look when run on it).

    ReplyDelete
  42. On a brand new Dell Inspiron with Terabytes of USB HDD's and dual 500GB internal HDDs with 8megs of memory, on an Intel board with dual Quads (3.00mHz) ....I haven't had any trouble except that I'm a newbie, so everything is a bit 'greekish' to me.
    Cheers everyone. Perhaps F16 was intended for

    ReplyDelete
  43. I still believe Fedora should have offered the partition table changes as optional, not default... And even if they were default, big warnings should be thrown at the user informing of the changes and the potential consequences of installing F16 using the default settings.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I have successfully installed the latest Fedora release on an IBM Thinkpad T42 (released in 2003) and a Dell Dimension 300 (with only an nVidia GeForce FX 5200 and 2GB of ram as the only hardware changes from the default options at the time of build, built a year or so later) with no issues whatsoever. The nVidia card works as well as it is supposed to with the non-prop versions of the drivers from the installer dvd on the desktop and on the Thinkpad everything works ootb, including the fingerprint reader. The problems do seem to be with the HP hardware, this is not the first blog I have come across slating Fedora on HP devices. However it is the first that completely fails to take into account the way HP now handles support for F/OSS based operating systems like Fedora and that there is NO support whatsoever for a lot of devices that are now out of production.
    Sure, Ubuntu and others work fine... that appears to be because of their sponsor's charitable work with older/non-supported hardware. Suck it up and move on, or failing that due to wanting to test properly... line to use custom grub boot options and anaconda scripts from installer only media.
    Fedora is bleeding-edge and has never claimed to be for first time users, although their live media IS making it easier for converts from Windows and other distributions to use from the start a little knowledge is kinda expected. Failing GNU/Linux knowledge... the ability to google for workarounds or ask questions from the community, instead of outright slating

    ReplyDelete
  45. Thanks for your comment, glad it worked for you...

    On a different note, since you mentioned "the ability to google for workarounds or ask questions from the community, instead of outright slating"... I guess I could say you could have read my comments before making yours, you probably wouldn't have said what you did if you had... Unless you are a Fedora fanboi, that is.

    ReplyDelete
  46. i too have installed f16 on my dell optiplex machine without any problems except after installation it fails to start gnome.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Tried fedora 16 on my Dell Precision 470, and experienced flickering screens, and the computer kept hanging. Am even now thinking of going either CentOS or Oracle Linux route. anyone had a successful install on a machine with intel xeon?

    ReplyDelete
  48. I just installed Fedora 16's KDE spin (I cannot stand the stupid new Gnome 3.)

    It was an unpleasant install. The two ugliest parts (1) the "firstboot" stuff failed spectacularly and I ended up with a black screen; since I use a static network (no DHCP around here), that meant also no network since NetworkManager doesn't seem to have any type of command line configuration (I ended up creating a /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts file by hand) (2) the fonts look horrible compared to, say, Fedora 14.

    Another ugly fail was in the initial "yum update", which featured both a selinux error *and* a grub (not grub2) error for memtest86.

    What a disappointment. I don't believe that a newbie would stand for such a sloppy distribution.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Just installed fedora16 x86_64, So far eventless and nothing dramatic, I have two hdds, ONe runs my windows-xp, came with the desktop, So I have another sata drive running Linux, I use this method from at least 2001, Now Anaconda wont show me an option to install Grub on first drive, sda, THe only options are either on sdb or sdb1 (LOL), Manually doing grub2-install /dev/sda worked, THe grub2 screen does not show any splash, there is a grub splash.xpm inside /boot/grub (WOndering what is that for anyway, Apart from that, THere is no option in admin menu to disable selinux(maybe I have to use spectacles), Now there are 765 packages to update and another 50 to install for compatibility, LOL I have installed only 1895 packages in total and have to update so much, The only recommendation from my side to Fedora, Just install on a few machines nefore releasing the JUNK!!,

    ReplyDelete
  50. Fedora 16 x64 runs fine for me. If you don't like that, get into windows again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heil Hitler!... Good that you gave me an option to go to Windows instead of a gas chamber, because after all, the only criteria worth keeping in mind is whether Fedora works for you, right?

      Delete
  51. I was working good with F16 KDE x86_64 until I got the official update of the newer kernel. I have some serious problems now........
    This is the main issue with my Fedora KDE.
    I receive an official update to make my life better but, sometimes the opposite happens......
    (I use only KDE , I hate the gnome versions of Fedora)
    The KDE version is POWER.
    Anyway Fedora OS is very strong, rather simple-user friendly (autoplus...) and very stable, so it is difficult for me to change it. It's like a fatal mistress for me.
    Sorry. I will keep it anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Fedora is living on the edge, and as such, it can mean trouble when receiving so many Kernel updates in one release window. Users requiring specific drivers for their video cards, for instance, might sweat it with Fedora, certainly more than they would with other more conservative distros.

    Having said so, Fedora is relentlessly improving and getting closer to average users little by little. For now, I would still recommend it to advanced users only, specially since there are other easier alternatives out there like Kororaa or Fuduntu.

    ReplyDelete
  53. all distro are livin on the edge. windows with its many paid emloyees working on it full time, can only release an os every five years. realistically. 6-8 month tme frame arent enough.

    so with 6 month cycles , ubuntu, fedora, opensuse are all bleeding edge. except for debian stable, ubuntu lts and centos.

    ReplyDelete
  54. The #1 thing I do when booting a test version of Fedora, is to disable SElinux.I "Hit Tab" at the 1rst Grub menu and append: selinux=0

    This way I eliminate nasty security errors and then re-enable it -once things are patched and more post-install stable.

    I also fetch either; EasyLife, Autoplus and/or Fedora Utils.
    They make everything pretty painless.

    Anish

    ReplyDelete
  55. Hola e instalado el fedora 16 X64 en un laptop Samsung R439 el cual conecto por HDMI a un monitor Samsung P2370HD en 1080p y me funciona de maravilla, puedo poner una película en el monitor para que miren mis hermanos y seguir programando en la pantalla del laptop y funciona muy fluido, no podido leer todos los comentarios, pero a mí me funciona bien y como dicen en algún comentario puede ser la versión del kernel ,de pronto podrías arrancar y pasar a consola ,actualizar el kernel , si no te funciona te recomiendo uses debían

    ReplyDelete