FC5 still beta / not useable

[forumuser]

I´m totally disapointed concerning the final release of FC5 as it is presented to the community.

I installed several times FC2/FC4 on different machines (as listed below) without major problems. Today, I made a fresh FC5 installation on a hp vectra vli6, pii 350mhz desktop and a hp ob4150b piii, 650mhz laptop. From today´s point of view, not really modern HW, so hard to imagine (and of course, not acceptable) that things that worked out in the past suddenly not longer do.

Chosing core install/customized install makes no difference at all, concerning the problems as stated below.

Default run level 3, selinux has been disabled (in ks-file "selinux --disabled")

0. SElinux is now enabled by default. Why? - I´m pretty sure most people do not use selinux at all.

1. Missing pcmcia support. Not longer recognizing xircom creditcard based nic cards at installation process (xirc2ps_cs). After installation (using another nic) the cards seem to work.

2. FC5 hangs on "starting message bus", both concerning laptop and desktop. Service must be disabled.

3. The complete installation process via http/nfs runs very slowly. (Checking dependencies in packages....)

4. On laptop (ATI driver) xorg-x11 driver not switching to 1024x786 resolution, still using 800x600.

5. On desktop (MGA driver) the screen crashes after udev is started (no possibility to interfere)

6. Cannot compile AVM FritzCard PCI ISDN driver (as it was done on FC2/FC4): Maybe this might not be a problem to FC5 only but may concern new kernels in general (closed source drivers). But a working capi driver is a MUST for my productive systems.

After having wasted a lot of time when struggling with these problems, there's one question to ask for: What has been done to this release????

Hard to believe that such a unstable version is presented to the community as the final version.

I already know that FC will always be a development platform for rh's commercial products, but now thinking that this was the last time I've worked with new FC versions.

Switching back to FC4.

For the future, I'll switch to CentOS.

[Omega Blue]

I have no problems with FC5 so far, upgraded several FC3 and a couple of FC4 installations to it.

0. No problem with SELinux, you can turn it off anytime. You have to remember FC5 is supposedly bleeding edge, experimental stuff. They put new things there to be tested, so some of them will be included in RHEL.

1. The PCMCIA support is better for me. I can just plug in an Orinoco card and set it up in no time at all.

2. Sorry to hear this. Don't have this problem, either.

3. That's to be expected, esp. when the distro was first released.

4. No experience with that

5. No experience with that, either

6. You're still using ISDN?

[bob]

Well, I can understand your frustration and decisions to switch rather than fight but I hope you make (tactfully) your feelings known here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate The developers don't monitor our Forum and should get feedback, both good and bad, to help make the next version less problematic.

[pparks1]

0. SElinux is now enabled by default. Why? - I´m pretty sure most people do not use selinux at all.

This was asked during installation, you could have turned it off. I believe it asked the very same question in FC4 as well.

The complete installation process via http/nfs runs very slowly. (Checking dependencies in packages....)

I think the delay is with the way FC5 checks and not necessarily with http/nfs installs. I guess I just don't install enough to really care about a couple of minutes during the install routine. I install from nfs and ftp and usually just get the process going and leave for awhile. When I return it's usually finished.

I'll switch to CentOS

It's a great product. Very stable, fewer updates, longer supported life. Build directly from RHEL SRPM's so nearly everything you read on these forums applies. I run one box at home with FC4, and the rest of my machines are all running CentOS.

[ramaswamyps]

i have installed fc5 and it works!
ihad to install 6 times to get working kde.
the anaconda itself has some internal problems sometimes it skips a step or two .
it said internaal error while writing boot loader two times.
it did not ask about selecting partition directly went to install packages and then it realised where to write and said internal error two times.
once it could not determine the dependencies for selected packages for 2 hrs.
the main problem is if u want to install from cds u have to do at the time of installation itself all u want.
later it will never look for cds for packages. everything done by yum only.
termination of install even for a failed copying of a doc file is very troublesome.
there must be a provision to skip a failed install of a package or two if at all it can load a bootable installation.
that would save half the installation problems.
once installed it has been working for last 15 days and updated to kde-3.5.2.2 and mplyaer and sorts.
going strong. two times it could not show login screen . reported something bad going on.
on restaarting it repaired itself and booted correctly.
it takes unusually longer to setup networking eth0.
ntpdate cant sync .it says it cannot contact server.
no doubt fc4 is more reliable .
this may take some time to get stabilised with updates.
apart from these problems the look and feel of fc5 is good.