Shared publicly  - 
+Fedora Project: is there some basic reason why you never regenerate the install images?

Right now the F19 install images use some ancient 3.9-based kernel. Which means that they may boot on most machines, but it's missing wireless ID's for new laptops etc, so making it useful is unnecessarily painful.
Marc-André Laverdière's profile photoMark Austin (ganthore)'s profile photoPeter Hulscher's profile photoEnigma Hernandez's profile photo
Just met this head on yesterday! 3.11 kernel fixed all my problems
Do they really? Aren't there any nightly install images? :o
I ran into a similar issue with OpenSuse 12.3.  I could install just fine, but when the computer went through the 1st boot it all just stopped stating things were missing.  I verified the ISO checksum, reinstalled and the same issue.  I could get to the CLI login and actually login, but I had not network connection.

My solution was to roll my own version with all the updated packages in SuseStudio.  Worked like a charm.
+Walter Medak yeah, it hits newer Haswell laptops with the newer intel wireless. 

Which is perfectly supported by F19 - it's just that you need to do an update to get a newer kernel. But without networking, that update is kind of hard to get..

So you have to do something insane like use a USB network dongle to get wireless working. Instead of just having +Fedora Project update install images every couple of months or something.

Edit: sane people use a USB network dongle and just do "yum upgrade" using that. Me, I just transfer the kernel git tree on a USB memory stick instead and recompile my own kernel, and then do a yum update over working wireless.

Either way, it's just stupid. When F19 already has a working kernel, it's just not on the install image.
Just to clarify: I'm not talking about making a "new release". I'm just talking about refreshing the install images with the packages that F19 already has updated to and that you get if you do "yum update".
+Linus Torvalds afaik there is no QA capacity for doing something like that, the whole reason Fedora has a serious pre-release freeze period is to make the installer not get screwed by collateral damage in the main OS, like systemd/dracut/kernel/devicemapper changes. So the QA costs of doing a respin are quite high esp if we want people to use it. There is quite a good chance that making an install image from updated F19 packages won't actually install.
Just to clarify: More install images mean bigger testing matrix is. It is not possible to re-release images with updated kernels without testing. Installation process is not an easy task, there are bugs reported, this would make everything much more difficult. Refreshing stable images is IMHO not the best way.

For geeks like Linus, there are Rawhide images. I can imagine not having WiFi driver can be annoying. Maybe to boot over network/internet to use newest kernel applying all the updates in Anaconda could help. This needs some proof-of-concept tho.
It's not like Ubuntu is any better about QA, they broke the "ia32-libs" package somewhere around Meerkat and didn't fix it until Ringtail, so there's no supported LTS release that "just works" for 32-bit binaries on 64-bit systems.
+Sandro Mathys +Dave Airlie: You don't need to make any extra Q&A.

Christ, you can even point to the old ones by default. But every month, just auto-generate new images (perhaps even just the network install one - that's the small convenient one that will always download the most recent version of all other packages anyway, so your Q&A argument is pure garbage). And make them available.

Because right now you say "we don't have Q&A to verify the images", and I'm telling you "that's bullshit, because the old image is known to be broken, so claiming that the new images might be broken is all kinds of stupid, isn't it"?

And no +Lukáš Zapletal , I don't want to have rawhide images. I want to get a stable F19 install. And if you have Q&A issues, you'll have angry users that did "yum upgrade" and it resulted in a non-working system for them.

So all your arguments are just f*cking stupid. Call it F19.x, warn people that it's "more up-to-date", and just stop making stupid excuses for having an image THAT DOES NOT WORK, because you want to not test whether the new image MIGHT NOT WORK.

Does nobody in +Fedora Project really not understand that "it might just work" is a lot better than "it's known not to work"?

It's really not rocket science. Q&A has absolutely nothing to do with it, and you're just spouting nonsense.
+Linus Torvalds Isn't there a way to to install package files locally in yum? I know you can do it with dpkg... it's how I got Debian working on my Eee PC. (Ralink Wireless Chipset)
+Camo Yoshi yes, you can download the rpms and put them on a USB stick after you installed things and notice it didn't work.

You could even edit the DVD image using ISO master or whatever, and try to upgrade things directly that way. There's a million ways to fix things if you're an expert. I recompiled my own kernel, because that's what my particular expertise is..

But the point of a distro - even to experts - is to make things easy, and that's doubly true for people who want to be just users. So giving them an install image that "just works" is a damn good idea. Instead of wasting everybodys time with stale images that contain packages that will be immediately upgraded anyway (which is why the Q&A argument is so particularly stupid).
Probably for the same reason FreeBSD only has a short-lived binary package tree: they don't care, and there aren't enough of them to effectively maintain it.
And here all this time I thought that unnecessary pain was the driving force of IT.
+Linus Torvalds Totally agreed. That's why I tend to stick to Debian; almost everything just works, and if it doesn't it's easy to get working.
+Linus Torvalds  I thought you were leaving Linux stuff out of G+. :P

Well I'm glad you changed that.
Linus Torvalds
+Carlos José Checo Vásquez I don't do kernel development on G+, that's what email is for. The exception is for some really random stuff: if I end up having some bit-twiddling question for people, I might do it here.

On G+ I do my "grumpy old man" routine, where I vent my frustrations with the world.
This is one benefit for Arch Linux 's rolling release and monthly install ISO "snapshot". 
+Linus Torvalds you didn't even parse what we are saying very well, the QA isn't on the post install state, its on the state of the packages in the install image. The fact you harp on about the updating after the installer is finished shows you aren't seeing the actual problem.

Recreating the images from the latest packages with the old anaconda is not guaranteed to produce an installer that works at all, so automating generating them is fine, but someone needs to test boot those images and make sure they even reach the installer and anaconda hasn't had collateral damage from other packages. Now if we were to produce those images and then you found they didn't work you'd bitch about Fedora making unusable install images that you can't use, and why didn't someone QA them.

This isn't trivial, anaconda has a lot of deep knowledge of things it probably shouldn't but in the past systemd/dract and device mapper changes have all required changes in anaconda itself.

I myself used to bitch about the fedora feature freeze blocking a lot of packages until the sheer amount of dependencies anaconda has on the underlying OS came into view, we used to have an anaconda that had a lot less deps but then people gave out that anaconda was all custom code that didn't run any of the system tools. Can't win.
+Camo Yoshi
Debian is a radical computer terrorist organization. Which is why I love them, but that same thing might turn some other people off.
Fedora has almost never worked for me since the last decade or so on a whole bunch of machines. Thats why I gave up on them and started on Debian ... Only to slip into Ubuntu and Mint. I agree with +Linus Torvalds that the point of a distro is to ease the entire process and not make you work around solving silly issues. Ubuntu has also fucked up often but 9 out of 10 times it has worked fine on even strange config systems.
+Paul Frederick Wait, how are they a radical computer terrorist organization? Now I'm confused. :S
So it seems that there's a chicken and egg issue which says that you need working wireless to get the new kernel that is needed to produce working wireless. 

But from a purely "hack it - get it working - who cares how" point of view - can't one practically work around this with a cat5 cable and and an ethernet port?

Or are we talking about the hardware case where that isn't feasible from a pure hardware perspective?
The install CD itself isn't broken, it becomes broken when used with new hardware. i have it right beside me atm and i can install it on the laptop i have right beside me. to be honest screaming "ITS BROKEN, YOUR ALL IDIOTS" is frankly incorrect and rather silly. If I bought a computer with X piece of hardware that I knew's firmware wouldn't be up to date out of the box on X distro is it the distro's fault or your own. for example If i decided to install Debian wheezy and nouveaus version didn't support my gt740m graphics card out of the box is it Debians fault? No, It's my problem I should have chose a more up to date distro or a roll your own distro.
+Dave Airlie what part of "make them available" did you not get?

I already said you don't need to change the default image. Point to the old stale one all you like. But make F19.x images available for people who have machines the old image doesn't even work for.

And you know what? Maybe having some actual testing of such a thing would actually improve the mess that is anaconda. Every single release, anaconda seems to be problematic. Might that have something to do with the fact that apparently it gets zero incremental testing  in between releases?

Call it "rawhide lite" if you want to, and add red warnings. I just don't understand why you cannot seem to get the "current install images are broken" part. 

Because those "well-tested" install images were tested with old hardware, and are known broken with new ones. I really don't understand why you can't seem to understand that basic fact. 

I'm not talking about some theoretical breakage of "what might go wrong" like you are. 
+Linus Torvalds Yeah I think I remember you saying something about KDE here and Chrome OS maybe.

With time I generalized your statement to all Linux and it's true that you meant Kernel since is the area which would make no sense on doing here too for some reasons if not many.
+Benjamin Schanzel One may not always have access to ethernet. Most of the time I don't, especially being on a college campus.
+Linus Torvalds "make them available" is what you say you want, until it doesn't work, then it'll be listen to my bug reports, then it'll be why do you make broken images available, you guys all suck at this stuff.

Fedora won't make things available unless they have some hope of working, and that involves resources to at least do some basic testing on it, but even just building the images requires developer time to produce the images, space to store them etc and Fedora release engineering who does all this stuff isn't really a time rich entity, they have to transfer their focus to F20 when F19 is baked otherwise it would never happen.

btw this isn't theoretical, there were fedora respins done in the past, it got harder and harder as the update packages diverged from the baseline release, and from what I can see the community stopped doing the task.

I do agree maybe it might make anaconda less shitty, but again its a priority thing, make the next release happen or delay it to provide updated images.
+Linus Torvalds you are wrong about this one. install images should not be regenerated without a change to the version number. F19 install image should not change at all -- even to update the kernel. Why? Because a user should have an expectation that the image they download today is the same as the one they downloaded last week. 

Lets not forget, an updated kernel can break things too, leading to a potential varying experience with what the user thinks is the  same image.

Maybe a better solution would be to have an updated naming convention for regenerated images, first of every month, a regenerated image with a new name 19-October, 19-November, etc. 
+Brian Fagioli, I imagine that's why RHEL and CentOS use point releases. 6.5 is going to have kernel fixes I've been looking forward to since March. 
I feel like Mom and Dad are fighting. I love Fedora and I love Linux :)
I have been wondering about this for ages!
Other than the reason Linus mentioned,not every one has access to high speed internet. Some people would prefer a monthly install/upgrade(upgrade may cause difficulty) to keep their systems almost up2date.

Another case, install fedora on a PC just 2 months after release. The first update will be a essentially a reinstall. It takes 2-3 times longer than the install itself. Most packages need to be updated, they must be download, installed, verified and old packages need to be removed.

I guess you can release images that use the kernel/systemd/drucut from release to boot and run anaconda; however, install the most recent version of the packages.
As mentioned multiple times above, the respins are available with the latest software incorporated.  Once a month I load the latest respin onto a thumbdrive for installs, which saves updating time too.
I actually reimaged a laptop just yesterday with F19 as it turned out (Lenovo W520) and did it over wireless and it took - I don't know 10-20 mins for the install and probably less than that for the first yum update. This was from a complete DVD image that was burned onto a thumbdrive. Couldn't have been more painless.
Why everyone cannot see the simple point that +Linus Torvalds is trying to make?

See, if I donwload the F19 image and install it, the first thing it will do on the first reboot is ask me to download the tons of updates available since the image was created.  Kernel updates, driver updates, security updates, the lot. All major distros work like this, by the way, and it is very frustrating.

What +Linus Torvalds is simply asking for is, please, give me an install image with all these updated packages/kernels already there. Otherwise each time you install a new OS you have to watch a live proof  of the theorem: "Time spent updating a freshly installed OS is directly proportional to the age of the image"  At best, of course at worst the lack of some update in the image prevents you from... updating in the first place!

This is what +Sandro Mathys does not get. There is no need to "test" this updated image, or at least its testing can be assimilated to the people installing the base image + updated packages over that image. Concerns about version numbers are secondary.

The Windows world is somewhere in the middle. Microsoft is continually issuing updates and once in a blue moon they get all the updates together and call them a "Service Pack". Then they "release" "Windows xxx SP y" and call it a day. But at least save you from the time of having to start from scratch each time you install the OS. Of course, nothing saves you from installing updates released after the SP, but at least it is something.

This approach works for MS because they take years to release a new OS, in the Linux world things move a lot faster and probably the best idea is to release "F19-October 17" or something like that.
Although the most recent is from September, so I'm not sure which kernel it has
I have to second the opinion of one commenter, when you've tried the rest, go to the best: Arch Linux.
+Alfonso Garcia that isn't what Linus asked for btw, so maybe you should read, he really just wants and updated installer image with a new kernel and all the anaconda bits.
+Brian Fagioli I don't think the images should be the same just because the user is expecting that. Since when does the technical part is decided from a user expectation point of view ?. Let the programmers decide what goes on the distribution which is in this case better software.

I'm a regular user and I didn't expect the images from one date to another to be the same so I can tell you are wrong form my own experience.

It would be a thrill if I didn't have to update after I install the distribution after I had to download and install it.

But I don't reject the proposal of renaming but not the simplified way you are seeing it. I would choose some numbering system that can tell me of the state of the updates like quantity of updates counted one by one or the download size difference.

Because If I have this recent image and I have to reinstall the OS if theres only 10 MB of updates  I wouldn't benefit by downloading 800 MB or maybe 4 GB just for that. So the logic conclusion is to install the one I have and updating.

And why the hell not, do this


the x is for the quantity of updates, b is for size of updates in MB and finally date dd mm yy

but a simple date is not good enough for the problem being addressed.
I don't think most of you are understanding what Linus is getting at. He's making a suggestion to help the average user. The average user isn't going to "roll your own". I myself have a Yoga which has no ethernet port. I'd have to dig around for my USB ethernet adapter and hope I didn't leave it back at the datacenter again. I don't like dicking around with things too long so I'd just move onto something that already worked.
The live respins linked multiple times should cover this, and if they don't, can someone explain why? The Fedora community spends a fair amount of time generating the respins and doing some level of testing on them. 
+Dave Airlie you have the patience of a saint, I'd have thrown in the towel on this one already. Kudos++
+Walter Francis it used to be live installer worked quite different to non-live, though it should of course still install.
+Jeff Irvine bingo. 

I already listed two ways an expert can fix it (build your own kernel, or use a USB dongle to get networking support).  It was annoying, but more importantly, it was not something a normal user would do.

Everybody seems to be really confused about the problem. Some people point to ethernet (really? On a modern laptop? What kind of clunky 7lbs ancient tanks are you guys using? Modern thin-and-light laptops don't have ethernet), others say "just use yum upgrade", missing the point entirely.

And yet others (yes, I'm looking at you again, +Dave Airlie) point to yet other "expert" solutions where you have to know more than the obvious google result from "get fedora" to get updated images from unofficial random sources.

That wasn't the problem. I'm an expert. I had an expert workaround already. I shouldn't have needed to have one, but more importantly, if I hadn't been an expert I would just have given up.
+Linus Torvalds You don't need a USB dongle. You can use an Android phone and activate tethering. To wi-fi nonetheless. That driver's bound to be available. That's what I did on a Haswell Vaio with no Ethernet, no USB Ethernet dongle and no wi-fi in the kernel I booted.
+Dave Airlie Unless I misunderstood the original query, Linus is looking for install media, updates to an existing system wasn't in scope, but maybe that has morphed. 
+Linus Torvalds not pointing at any expert solution, just why what you want isn't trivial, and producing non-expert images that don't work is pointless. To make sure they work you need to test them, that takes resources and Fedora resources are already stretched thin, maybe someone will read this and join Fedora and take up the baton of producing these images. Like if you want a non-expert mode it needs to be as obvious and easy as finding the default installer, which IMHO means you need to test it.
+Dave Airlie what about including tested kernel in fedora installation AND untested up-to-date kernel as second option?
+Philipp Kern that's silly too, you assume they have a smartphone. It shouldn't require extra hardware, or USB sticks and a second computer, it should just work.
+Linus Torvalds
OK after your expert kernel building comment I want more fish pictures. Forget about that Linux stuff.
+Philipp Kern what do you think an android phone with tethering is? That USB cable in between should have given you a clue.

It's a big and expensive USB dongle, wouldn't you say?

And a normal user would never do something like that. He/she/it would say "oh, I have no networking" and that's where the game stops.
Don't know anything about the Fedora Project but just +1'd this post because Linus gave us Linux : )
There is a lot of "stable" updates that includes new ID's for devices, PCI, USB, and including wireless. Why then to not make some way to solve this issue without recompiling the kernel? E.g. text file with ID's , options for them (for quirks for example) and sure module name. This way distro releases can be more updated, they will just include this file externally, or user can put them on USB flash.
Or at least fedora can provide as single file "servicepack" for system.
+Brian Fagioli, I think +Linus Torvalds is exactly right. In the last two (2!) weeks two (2 again!) friends of mine tried installing Ubuntu: Both went to and were directed to version 12.04 LTS, which is as we all know one and a half years old (though it is updated). One had no wifi, one had no sound. Both said: Fuck it! Back to Windows.
And that's what Linus is about, I think, and again: he's right.
+Philipp Trommler
You are right I had the same problem with 13.04 (no wifi). Fortunately I could use a different USB adapter so I found a 1-click solution from another user. But that kind of problems make most people roll back.
Have you tried emailing the fedora team directly and told them to eat your shit?
We need to invest more heavily in automation -- and we know it. That's going to be a big focus of the release cycle after F20. Automatically updated and smoke-tested (but not fully QAd) images seem like a reasonable, useful output.
Rich W.
It's not just noobs either. My liking for a distro is inversely proportional to the amount of bullshit I have to go thru for an install.

If the live spins are the solution (as many seem to be saying) then why doesn't fedora point the download links at them?

…or would that upset the semantically inclined?
This is the same with all linux distros, and they should be updated so you can f.ex. select a newer kernel. I had some problems installing ubuntu 12.04 on a HP machine due to nouveau modeset issues with the graphics card... (company linux image and laptop)

If +Fedora Project and +Ubuntu could automate this, generate new kernel with "backport" or-what-ever-you-want-to-call-them kernels, it would be great.
+Dave Airlie Since the updates are already being downloaded and installed, what needs to be tested? I'm an "average user" (web/iOS dev, not sys admin or kernel dev) so I'm sure I'm missing context, but if those packages already work after update, what's the deal?
+Linus Torvalds Of course it's a big and expensive USB dongle. But one many people actually have. And many people seem to think that they need an extra dongle, which they don't. ;-)

So in Debian land we do roll kernel updates into installers on stable updates. But there are also much fewer moving parts, as I guess a released Fedora gets more updates than a Debian stable would. (And in general it runs a kernel that's much too old for your standards.)
+Jamon Holmgren The basic issue is that we don't do much by way of gating for updates, and they don't necessarily keep API compatibility throughout the lifecycle of the distribution. This is an ongoing debate inside Fedora, historically about the balance between consistency vs. moving quickly (with both sides claiming end-user benefit). As we work on, I hope we can find a more modern balance where we can actually have more of both.
+Philipp Kern point with the android tethering over usb might be just another expert solution, but the idea is great and is quite simple todo even for normal users. I wish I have thought about it the last time my WiFi wasn't working and I had no Ethernet.
It's an interesting point that has to do about other distro's releases as well. I hope they will listen you +Linus Torvalds and change that annoying thing.
Hello Linus, how have you been doing?
Btw, +Dave Airlie, it would generally be sufficient to only update the actual kernel image (and obviosly that does imply also firmware, so there's that dependency) on the install DVD.

At that point, at least the network install CD should be about as up-to-date as it gets - even if you don't update a single package file (ie the kernel rpm file could be the same old one).

And if a newer kernel breaks something, you can (and should) just make a kernel bug report. Unlike so many other projects, we obviously do consider things like that bugs, regardless of other dependencies. New kernels should work perfectly fine with old packages.
Simon W
I really wasn't aware of this. I thought the +Fedora Project actually kept the kernel up-to-date, which they should, there I can agree with +Linus Torvalds .

Though on my Desktop PC with the latest kernel from fedora repos, the mint display manager doesn't start. Does anyone have this issue as well?
+Linus Torvalds I thought that was what jigdo was for. I tried finding .jigdo and .template files for F19 but came up empty though you can install jigdo, jigdo-gui, and pyjigdo.
+Jamon Holmgren , that is exactly right! Nothing needs to be tested, because these changes have already been released. +Linus Torvalds just wants these previously released updates to be compiled into an installation image that is updated each month or so. The arguments about lack of testing don't apply, since these updates will be applied via yum anyway. Are the defenders of the existing system trying to say yum is applying untested packages?
+Linus Torvalds I think that we should find a way to replace all of these annoying installers. Installing Linux on a PC/laptop should be as easy as flashing a new Android ROM in a Nexus phone. Something like with a installer could be a good solution.
I think is because a manpower problem. There is not enough people to test a new installation image in comparison with those that tested it in the release candidate phase. A simple change on the image could trigger installation bugs leaving your system unusable, be it because you are doing an upgrade or data lost on other OSs of your dual boot configuration
Wait, people still use Fedora? Why?
I stopped using Fedora when i cant update because there is no WiFi. Fedora doesn't even care that any new fresh built  kernel should work with old packages. For the Fedora project, a new kernel build means a new component and thus requires QA.
Played with Fedora for a bit. But I will not use any distro that doesn't natively support hardware, especially nowadays with wireless being the primary way people connect. Hell, even bare bones stripped down, just the basics distros have WiFi support.

I havent taste Fedora yet, maybe next time I install Linux
oh I didn't know Fedora was still an active project
+Tim Cummings "WiFi is the primary way people connect". Are you sure? The idea of installing a new distro over WiFi scares me. Any method other than media plugged directly into the computer scares me.

This problem used to exist with EN drivers. Remember when you used to have an EN driver install floppy for your shiney new EN card/dongle/whatever? I still have a magic floppy and a USB floppy drive that will boot any machine with a USB port. And yes, a floppy to which I can copy WiFi drivers...

+Linus Torvalds Fedora is a distro for expert users IIRC. Or it used to be marketed as such for quite some time. Ubuntu is for "normal" users i.e. those coming from Windows.
I still don't see why there is no room for compromise?!!! What about including all the latest updates in yum's cache folder within the iso? No way this can break anything afaict...
+Sandro Mathys But users will complain the possible bugs anyway if they update the system, which is recommended by any Linux distributions for security concerns, right?
+Dave Airlie
maybe I did not understood, and I'm not a Fedora expert. Can you tell me what's the difference between "and updated installer image with a new kernel and all the anaconda bits." and installing the base system with the original image and then fetching and applying the latest updates? Would the new kernel and all the anaconda bits end up being there by doing that? Will the resulting system be different?
I think that most other comments are already pointing this out, and perhaps there are subtle differences between the two that I'm not aware of.
In was trying to mean, the end result I'd really like is to be able to get a ISO image, install it and not having to update a gazillion packages just after the installation. Of course, with an image old enough I may not even be able to install or update because it is missing drivers/kernel updates and the base install cannot connect to the network.
And yes, there are workarounds and all of us have applied them at some point (hello, nVidia!!) but avoiding the hassle in the first place would be much better.
You're absolutely right. I also noticed that. Do you think Fedora people read this?
+Paulius Zaleckas anaconda shouldn't break on new kernel versions.

The best approach would be to have a stable minimal live system for the installer which itself doesn't need to be updated but comes with newer versions of packages to install. Optionally let the installer boot with the latest kernel.

Then, automatically generate new versions of the install iso weekly. Could even be nightly snapshots since the packages are considered stable anyways and it can in no way break the installer. 
I seem to remember Fedora having a refresh DVD at one point a few years back. Can anyone confirm this? If so, there's probably a wiki page about it. Maybe the practice can be encouraged to continue, or a Fedora spin dedicated to that purpose can be organized.
+Linus Torvalds is right. I would say 90% of computer users know nothing about them and would not know where to start.

Apple's popularity grew because they sold the idea that their devices "just work" and tried to improve on it. It seems that Ubuntu is the only distro (I may be wrong) trying to make it easy for the end user and they appear to be attracting the most attention. Just search google for linux on chromebook - my results show chrubuntu and crouton (ubuntu and debian) for the first 5 pages.

I used to hate installing Debian on servers and laptops until I found the non-free drivers netinstall debian iso. That disc has made my life so much more enjoyable.
+Torge Husfeldt nice idea, not the most economical or expedient. But it would achieve the desired goal and would preempt all the objections raised in this thread.
I think a new iso image with a new kernel would be easier to manage, and like +Linus Torvalds said, the kernel is abi compatible. QA should not be an excuse not to do it, whether the main download links should point to it is another matter. (I think it should)
+Sahak Petrosyan I would recommend Ubuntu Gnome instead of the Main release there is a Daily build for 13.10. Unity DE gets too slow and that's what they are trying to fix and claiming they did but by including more search functions I don't see how that's possible. And Unity DE in my opinion is just stupid in the way they designed the functionalities of the Dash. What I like is the HUD but not enough to go back.
F19 was a big big mistake.

Knowing that now .. would have stayed using F17 (or F18).

Seen also others struggling with it .. just collapsed when yum update and the person had crypto system and was quite impossible to fsck the borken fs with the borken fsck in situ. Ha ha. And the newest kernel just panics in Stinkpad.
I agree with +Linus Torvalds about just updating the essential stuff to get the internet working out of the box for the regular user, then the rest of the packages can be upgraded. No need to include the whole bunch of updates in the install media, just fix the internet access and you fix everything.

It's also frustrating trying to fix things in a machine that can't google...been there and I can tell you a normal user would just go back to wondows.
I would LOVE to take +Fedora Project's side on this (I'm an AVID Fedora user) - but +Linus Torvalds is right.

This seems like a smile solution

Take the "net-install" ISO and just upgrade the Kernel. Then release it as "net-install-f19-2013101800".

Then just call the "old" one "stable" for those with older hardware.

Isn't Linux supposed to be about "choice"? Just give us a choice.
For things like this is why common people, are afraid on trying Linux, which is a sad thing, Linux has not yet been able to get rod of it's nasty "Geeky OS" label, it is such a promising OS but we still want it to be geeky close env 
Why would anyone want to use google+ to ask for a working linux install image for joe public with a modern laptop again, ever.....what a great demonstration of NOT getting the point.....the guy who wrote the first kernel can fix the issue.....joe public bins the dvd and gives it ?

If only there were some sane mechanism for getting newer drivers without having to invoke GCC. 
+Eppu Haavisto no, magic would be a stable kernel abi so manufacturer drivers didn't have to be re-written every 6 months. The Linux driver model is really the elephant in the room, but a really smart guy decided about two decades ago not to listen to a lot of other really smart guys on the topic.
+Samuel Thurston, you cite no new arguments to a previously well-debated issue.  Just saying that you are wrong is, therefore, a sufficient response.
+Eppu Haavisto Because I don't want to sound smart to others I really want to know these Distributions since I haven't had the need of looking for something else.

I don't know what does it matter if someone is ignorant or not but pointing it out just for the sake of it while trying to disguise it like advise show you are a manipulative person and a hypocrite a really bad one. But thanks for the info anyways.

Zorin no thanks, Linux mint hate it and Mandriva they want to solve the problem of drivers by dealing with companies but last time Nvidia updated their driver they changed support for multiple monitors from 4 to 3 on purpose so why am I going to trust in that approach  ?

You are the ignorant one who thinks can know the personality of every person or you only know very common people that pick their personalities from Movies and trends.
Why not just classify the regenerated ones as experimental or non-prod?
You binary-once-in-a-while-release people should realise that the install process is especially important for a system that's basically nowhere to be found preinstalled. Users expect from a Linux distro what they never have to think of when they buy their Mac or Windows PC. Nevermind that Windows install media still required floppy discs in a world that had abandoned them already, to ship SATA drivers, not so long ago.

Monthly refresh images with a 'boot alternative kernel' option shouldn't be that hard to make.
+Eppu Haavisto hahaha you clown ... You are going to need a paradigm shift to understand what I told you before. You still think you know something about me.

But to be fair with you I will give you one thing. You really think I was sarcastic the reason you are going to change your view to understand the situation. Anyways I'm not interested on letting you to know me better just to understand why you are so wrong on what you think you know.

One tip : If we people were so common and easy to analyze psychology wouldn't be difficult at all.

I had a really bad week so if you think you know something about me just keep it to yourself I'm NOT interested.
Fedora is not known as a newbie friendly distro. It is a great distro, but for those with more experience under their belts perhaps, much like debian. One could argue that all should be easy, but the beauty of Linux is the huge number of flavours that we can experiment and choose from. I personally use openSUSE as my main distro and there is a rolling release version called Tumbleweed meaning that once installed, one never needs to do that again (well in theory....). This would mean that once all issues are sorted, perhaps via Ethernet, you're good to go for as long as your device lasts. 
Is there a reason stuff like wireless ids are stored as kernel constants and not an easily updated file?
And as to no driver ABI. Well. It's been over 20 years now and I still can't expect a driver to work across automatic updates.

I spent a couple of hours looking for an unofficial driver patch for the Asus pce-n53 wifi adapter the other day to compile the supplied but not maintained driver based on kernel 2.6. It then broke when Ubuntu did an automatic update. In what universe is this acceptable?
Isn't there a way to propose a different driver to the community if someone founds it works better than the supported one ?

+Jethro Rose 

In the other hand well when you are using a custom OS derived from another one you can't expect it to preserve what they don't know is there. I think is simple logic. You are the one who has to maintain that customized OS not Canonical.

How come you don't figure that out of your situation ?

You don't believe your computer thinks or something , do you ?

Lately things smells like programmers are some sort of psychic freak that programs because if not they would die of boredom or something.
+Carlos José Checo Vásquez. I am a user who just wants stuff to work. The card was listed as supporting Linux on the box. It doesn't work out of the box and due to no Abi will continually break.

If we don't care whether or not Linux is usable by normal people then who cares.

But given Linus' rant on admin required for stuff on his daughters laptop under suse I think end user usability is relevant.

It shouldn't have to be this hard. Not that difficulty is high. I shouldn't need to be involved. If this was say, the M.D.'s laptop and he installed the update while abroad, he would end up with broken wifi and no way for me to log in and fix it.

No it isn't ubuntu's fault, it is an inherent issue with the lack of compatibility between binary drivers and the kernel.

Yes binary only drivers are bad. This one was supplied in source form. I still don't want to be fixing it continually.

If some level of driver compatibility was assured, I could have compiled the third party driver, stuck it under 3rdpartydriver folder or whatever and forgotten about it.
+Dave Airlie iirc fedora's initrd tries to load updates.img before running anaconda, and also supports drivers disk with "dd" parameter. Couldn't those be used to update modules to support newer hardware without re-testing the whole image?
Interesting read. I agree with Linus on this one. Working images should be made frequently available. 
+Jethro Rose Trust me I want every person in the world to have their computer work with Linux out of the box just like it has happened with me with Ubuntu. Of course I think it has being like this because I don't use Nvidia and neither I buy the latest computer in the market.

The purpose of a Distribution is to work of course user usability is relevant.

I just ask for some common sense when asking for a usable system. Computers don't think and if you modify the OS you have to maintain you change just like I have some little programs and scripts I use.

So it is completely acceptable that an update breaks your changes. Because for that to work in harmony you need to integrate your change with the ecosystem.

Out of the box needs more than just  work it needs integration between developers.

Do you intend to make that happen by posting non-sense ?

I will not ask you to think like me in this but if you think there's common sense in what you stated then I think I'm ok with that because I can't ask you more than that , Right ?
+Carlos José Checo Vásquez - with my Macs and Windows machines, I am able to update without drivers breaking.  I have non-apple and non-microsoft drivers installed on either OS, and it doesn't break when I do a regular security/non-major upgrade update. 

It usually doesn't even break when I do an upgrade to a new release.

I don't think expecting to be able to do so with other operating systems is unreasonable.

The fact that I can't is a defect.
+Jethro Rose With your Mac and Windows machines, you almost never update the kernel. Maybe once or twice in three years when a service pack arrives. And then, known errors do not get corrected for the sake of compatibility - instead, whole subsystems like USB are duplicated. Which is nice for your lazy hardware vendor who doesn't need to put any more work into it, but really bad for you when you get blue screens because you (un)plugged an inferior hardware device.

Also, especially on your Mac, you do not expect every hardware to work that isn't advertised as such. When Asus claim Linux support, but then fail to deliver native Linux support, it is really their fault for making your life uncomfortable.
end of the day, i have drivers that work across OS and kernel upgrades.  i.e., i have drivers from 10.7 that work in 10.9.

I don't get the operating system randomly breaking with an automatic update.

As to ASUS being at fault here yes and no.... well, driver source is available, but poorly unmaintained, and not in the official kernel.  either way though, there is source available (third party patch) but I STILL need to recompile it every kernel update.

Even if ASUS maintained the source for this driver, I'd still need to recompile it every kernel upgrade.

Which is retarded, and end result = machine automatically breaks on system update. 
+Jethro Rose Yes, it is entirely Asus' fault, for not getting their driver mainline and raising false hopes on their box. Either way, you are in the wrong thread with that topic.
+Eppu Haavisto Forget it man! You always win. You are so stupid you think it is justified to say that you didn't say you "know" anything about me while trying to say that you KNOW that I was being sarcastic. For you it is impossible that you were wrong. 

So do you really have to say : "I know something about you man"

So I can know you think you know something about me ?

Congratulations man! Woo Hoo! I hope you get a little star at school because that's so great.
Oh yeah yo got me there putting words on your mouth.

There's a saying in my country that goes :

"When John talks to me about Paul, I know better John rather than Paul."

So it is YOU who would write MY words with sarcasm. YOU are the one who sees sarcasm there NOT ME. 

I conclusion if it were you who wrote those words then I'm sure it is sarcasm coming from you since you see sarcasm there but because YOU and ME are not the same person you cannot say I would say that with sarcasm too.

You are a clown who believes everybody thinks like himself. I can clearly see that.

I'm going to say in plain English. FYI it was not sarcasm even though you see it as sarcasm.

Do you really enjoy talking about imaginary butt-hurts more than talking about Linux ?

Is that the name of your happy place ? Butt-hurts ?
Hi linus what's your favorite distro?
Why not OpenSUSE? Based off Slackware, but can use yum package manager. It also looks great. I found it to be more stable than Fedora.
Did someone actually use the L word in here? Oh my. :-P
+John D. Ritchie
Sometimes when you think it is everyone else it may in fact just be you who is struggling. The beauty of Linux is that you can ignore what everyone else is doing, and simply do things your own way. I know at least one of the morons that Redhat pays and I think he's a pretty sharp guy.
I don't know a lot of building a distro stuff.
But pure from Logic: 
if you can update the kernel on the installed system where is the problem with the iso?
for me it looks like: make a chroot env. run yum update kernel only repack it name it fedora 19.3.11(kernel 3.11) update it to the server.
I know there is some firmware stuff too but i thought yum has a group install thing.

or do i miss something ?
and why test that its not a Major Release? 

btw. +Linus Torvalds i have a haswell thinkpad with Ethernet ;)  
+Linus Torvalds
I totally agree with you, that's why I've migrated to #ArchLinux after having used #Fedora few days ...
I think that ... this problem is not just about #Fedora, but other distribution fail to be up to date ... causing problem to the user from beginner to medium level ... even if the expert always finds a way to fix the problems as you say, it will migrate to #Gentoo or #ArchLinux ... it is clear! .
Simple answer is they are not a rolling release distro.  If you want the latest kernel (that you yourself released lol) you'll want to be on something Arch Linux.   I've taken to just having the extra wireless drivers on hand if I need to install on for a laptop I am on but since I use Ubuntu.  Had to roll the alx driver by hand for 13.04, works out of the box for 13.10 for my Atheros card in my laptop.
Yes. Fedora 19 can't detect ethernet of my new laptop. But strange that it works with my wi-fi. Same with Ubuntu 12.10. But after updating  12.10 it can detect the LAN. So I'm on 13.10 :-)
better hang out with friends using different models of computer maybe some1 could save a download driver XP....for the day...fedora may need some culture polish for 'do-it' atmosphere.....>.^
Mr. Linus Torvalds , now as long as you're talking frankly and putting things bluntly on the table, I think you should have your say in everything related to the operating system after 20 years since the start of your kernel project. One of the examples is that many (not I )  still think the desktop environments are still not up to the level of satisfaction by the beginners.
Also please note that you should from now put the guidelines of what people should do after your absence someday.
Also, I want to tell you that to diffuse your nerves and vent out your frustrations I recommend making a tutorials youtube channel by your voice. and it's only about your kernel project. This is the tutorial playlist many would love it if you make record the tutorials in your spare time. I hope you like to teach. I feel superior when I teach.
1- How to program in C  for very newbie but always reflecting the Kernel. this means here only talk about only the required for the kernel, and not about everything that C provides.
2- You go in advanced level now, and talk about the kernel in detail like explaining the kernel code to the people who want to learn. This will always keep the project living.
3- Talk about how to make drivers for the kernel Linux in the sense you think it's best for the kernel. I mean the kernel you built it and you know its details.
When I saw a book once about how to write drivers for Linux not written by you Mr. Torvalds, I felt and still see it awkward.

And I think you should call for a summit between you and the major Linux distributions, Debian and Redhat mainly and other distributions, I think this can settle the dispute a little.  :) maybe if you add to the Linux license that the Linux distribution must thrive to distribute the latest kernel possible.

Thanks for your time.
Oh God, i absolutely love my Gentoo.

What in the world is so difficult in compiling a kernel?

People should really involve into growing their knowledge on Linux. Fedora, Ubuntu, binary distros in general, very nice for beginners, but how do you expect to learn anything by putting in Live Media , click Install, then Next, Next, Region, Next, Language, Next, Auto-partitioning, Next Next, Name, Password, Next, Next. Installed.

We don't even have hackers anymore, simple minded script kiddies. No wonder why we have stupid distros for new stupid generation, and it will not get better.

How many couldn't do anything without their GUIs? Couldn't even use a terminal, don't know what ifconfig is and are completely lost without their beloved NetworkManager.

No wonder.
+Jase Whipp The problem is not having the latest kernels on the repos, but rather having a non-buggy one on the install media. If the install media nets you a system with no wireless, on a hardware with no ethernet, it's a serious game breaking thing. That's why none of the arguments from Fedora dudes for not updating the install media fall short. This bug is a show stopper. Not for all users, but for some.
This is funny, because I attempted to try Fedora a while back, ran into this, stopped trying.  Literally this exact thing.  Got to the shell and went ... no network, no drivers, no possibility of getting drivers?  Back to Ubuntu, I guess.
I use/manage/install linux and linux based systems for a living.  It isn't worth anyone's effort, nor does anyone I know enjoy or want to go through the extra steps. I've all but given up on gnome/kde/whatever at this point because of this - between out of date distros, no display drivers and update incompatibility at install, it isn't worth messing with.

Linux explained his position really well, I thought.  There is no reason you can't keep the original ISO, with whatever out of date kernel/firmware.  But why not at least offer one with whatever needs updating?  Would be nice to hear a response to this, +Dave Airlie .  It's totally possible that I simply don't understand, too :)

If the issue is incompatibility with new packages + Anaconda, wouldn't that be a good excuse to dedicate some resources to remedying that problem?  Or am I over simplifying things?
+Cullen Lorsung the problem is resources don't grow on trees, we have to pick where Fedora QA spends its time and thus far there hasn't been resources to spend on this. The thing is Linus over simplified the amount of work to do something like this by an order of magnitude, its simple in his mind to produce images made from new bits, however for Fedora to advertise those images to users would require that at least some QA is done on them, and at that point its a resourcing problem.

We resolve new packages + anaconda problems in the next distro release, not in the current one btw, but it also means we have new features for anaconda to deal with as well.

Though I have to say the insane (not yours) comments on Linus G+ posts always make it worthwhile commenting, maybe people should learn to read before write :-P
How much resources get spent continually explaining to people in common installation failure scenerios that "you can't install at all  because we don't respin images with the one-line kernel fix you need to do so"?  I really don't think there is much balancing of these two things at all, and that's what I find truly irritating when people bring up the QA resources excuse.
+Jethro Rose "end of the day, i have drivers that work across OS and kernel upgrades.  i.e., i have drivers from 10.7 that work in 10.9."

That is nothing but pure luck. I've seen older drives create kernel panics when going from one version of OS X to another, hell, simply point upgrades will sometimes create breakage. So just because it doesn't happen for you, doesn't mean it never happens. Parallels for instance, regularly breaks between minor major OS X upgrades. Last time I cleaned up a mess like that was between 10.6 and 10.7, and I can't imagine it's getting any better.
+David Miller I think its just all resources are not created equal, and there is scope for someone to take up this work and do it, just not bandwidth in existing team members. If the task is so trivial surely someone would be doing it already, this points to me that the task also isn't near as trivial as people make out.
I was a Fedora-User for years on my home desktop PC. When about to use it on my work laptop for the first time, I also had a lot of driver problems while Ubuntu worked out-of-the-box.

I did now check my current kernel - 3.8.0-31. And there is nothing newer available in the repositories for my Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. - However, all my problems I had with the stock kernel, seem to be solved (sometimes GUI lockups).

I had smaller problems using the default kernels in the past - needed to use the Ubuntu-variants. I wonder if and why distributions cannot (or do not want to) use the original kernel variants.

If they would use the original unchanged kernel and or post their patches upstream, maybe they could rely on the kernel testing folks... - Anybody can explain if and why kernels need to be adapted?
It's interested to see all the Red Hat people here claiming lack of resources for testing and what not when they themselves single handedly are the reason why we don regenerate the install images but I'm pretty sure you +Linus Torvalds  have been using and already been part of Fedora community thus should know the history of Fedora unity team. If not I'm pretty sure +Dave Jones can tell you how they saved our ass in FC5...

I still think Ben from Fedora unity does occasionally regenerate the install images...
+Linus Torvalds Arch Linux always comes with the latest kernel. You won't like the installation process, because it's somewhat manual, but you may like the rest.
It's because of things like this that Linux continues to be a pain for "normal/regular" users... And some distro makers still wonder why Ubuntu gained suck track? Because they make it simple to install and run for "normal/regular" users.
Is it me, or is the Debian-side of things more aware of everything that's around a distro? Whenever Debian stable gets an update, you get a point release with its new installer image, you even get an updated jigdo file to update your old ISO by just replacing the stuff that is old, thus saving you a lot of time and bandwidth.
+Dave Airlie
Why not an alternative ISO with bleeding edge kernel and a "without QA" sticker on it?
Really! All these people are complaining about what he is saying. He is right why would a user want to download or install a OS that is not going to work with there hardware without tweaking. Not all users are experts this means that when the kernel does not work with there wireless adapter than Fedora just lost a user because the user will not try to fix it. Just upgrade your kernel images on the install CD. This is something that should be done anyway so that your OS works as best it can right out of the box. You can update the software packages later if you like just make sure that your kernel is working for your users right out of the box.
Defending the fedora side of this discussions its absolutely against the will of bring more people (normal people) to any linux platform. Imaging you are a normal user and decided to install linux for the first time. For some unknown reason lets say, they try on Fedora... most of the them will be doing the first and last linux installation.... 
+Andreas Kraska The problem with these stickers is that people tend to peel them off and then come whining if such untested, unsupported stuff breaks for them and they learn the hard way that you meant it when you said "no guarantees".

+Linus Torvalds Not doing even a modicum of QA on an updated installer image won't fly, case in point being IIRC incompatible changes made to the kernel interface of netfilter sometime during 2.6.x. The userspace side either supported the old or new structures (and failed horribly if mismatched). A colleague of mine ended up writing wrapper scripts which dispatched to the matching iptables binary for an environment where both had to be supported (and didn't like it). I'd love a way to get up to date installation media/images to people and in a more timely fashion, but skimping on QA is not it.
I see people missing the point and talking about switching to other distros and rolling releases etc. including Ubuntu. That is missing the point, however what is interesting is that Ubuntu does exactly what is suggested and generates updated isos for LTS releases. This week 13.10 was released - which is irrelevant, and 12.04.3 was released which is relevant to the discussion as it is 12.04 respun with updated packages. There will be a 12.04.4 released at the same time as 14.04 gets released, then the point releases of 12.04 stop as there is a new LTS to move to. So at the moment, for long term support releases Ubuntu does respins with updated packages every 6 months until the next LTS turns up. Dunno if that is seen to be responsive enough on this issue, maybe a 3 month cycle would be better? Maybe some kind of daily auto build would be good, or maybe 6 months is OK.
+Linus Torvalds I think this is the best solution for all, just make network install iso's updated and point to them (Specially after 2+ months after release) +Dave Airlie that can't be that hard. ( among the unofficial live respins (monthly or so?) make the netinstall iso official). It would be the end of this debate.
I agree completely. I hate spinning up an installation mid cycle and it needs over 100 updates. Did Fedora ever have anything to say? 
Sandro Mathys wrote: Oct 18, 2013
"+Linus Torvalds: Regenerating install images would mean having additional freeze periods, repeating a lot of QA and bug hunting / fixing, and all that while already developing the next version which is usually due within 6 months time. It's simply not doable."

This remark encapsulates everything that is wrong with Fedora, Ubuntu, and numerous other projects: getting the next version rates higher than getting ANY version correct. Bin the next version, forget the next version, give it to us 2 years later if necessary, but FIX each and every version to a quality state (recognising that completely bug-free is unrealistic) BEFORE forgetting all about it and moving on to the next "big thing".
And GPT, they do not allow GPT partitions with Anaconda
I am happy with my Manjaro,they know what they are doing more than a billonaire company  employees
Perhaps if Red Hat would fund a enthusiastic crew inside a non profit org it would be cheaper for them and better for the distro
There are a lot of odd replies in this thread.

First, no one disagrees that hardware enablement is important. Arguing that Fedora is terrible for not valuing that is fighting an imaginary battle against a position which does not exist.

Second, everyone complaining about number of updates on first install: you are complaining about something else than this problem. And, in fact, there's a moderately easy solution for that now: do a network install, and choose to include the updates repository.
There is an assumption here I'd like to challenge.  Fedora doesn't seem to be the right distro for a new user of Linux.  New users shouldn't have to reinstall or upgrade to the next F?? level every 18 months or however long Fedora support lasts.  It has been my impression Fedora is for the agressive, risk-taking, "has to have the latest" crowd, not a rank amateur.
i give up from fedora long time ago, never work, to many bugs etc
thats not very improtant thing, but its a stupid mistake from old fedora project..
+Linus Torvalds The only solution I see to this problem without regenerating the install image is to have an extra CD and DVD, the first do a minimal install, no extra packages on that CD, but the installation wizard allows you to select package groups assuming you have the second disk with all other packages. This way there is no introduction of new bugs to the install image, and you get the updated system

It is like a netinstall pointing it to the updated local repository. It will not help with machines where the tested install image doesn't boot
+Dave Airlie in the old times of Redhat Linux, I used to do this sort of thing in a semi automated way (there was some documentation to help you as well) for my Local (in Peru) LUG, since bandwidth was more expensive than the time it would take to QA; I agree that the economics of it might not make sense in the US, but there is plenty of places where it still does and fedora is a global community, so all that might be missing would be to find the right sponsor/coach and try; any idea who that might be?
At first, if my mom will use Linux, any taste, we can't wait that she make some weeks studies before? Can't we? No, best thing is to go to nearest computer shop and buy one? WE all do know that this is almost impossible. What next? We, I and mom, take some Linux live-install disk and, yep, we are in busines. Or not? ( i am Gentooist) Back to computer shop and buy some Winsomething thing! 
Anyone have suggestion for stable and light distro with last kernel instead of fedora ? Because I just make "yum -y update" and continue use my computer with high stability. I just want tell, we experience different surprise with each new kernel because of that I hope fedora team not change idea and continue build ISO file with last more stable kernel. Because I can try fix my problem after install but if I can't install that distro to my computer how I can fix my problem ?
Saya ga tahu apa itu linux pak....
My idea that two distro not equivalent to FEDORA
I am still using ubuntu 12.04 with V3.5 kernel.
ArchLinux  your best choice.
+Ertan Erbek , well you did ask for a stable and light distribution with the latest kernel, and they meet that requirement without the extra bloat that one often finds with complete installs.
zixu mo
Debian is a good distro , with a rolling release, Suggest you guys using Debian, replaced Fedora, OpenSUSE, Rolling Release is very good to users.
Tony Lu
i am used 2 archlinux, it's awesome.
words dirty,reasonable +Linus Torvalds
After I found that using Fedora is more painful than using Ubuntu, which was after I found that Ubuntu will be some kind of disaster, I finally realized that what I need is just a PURE LINUX. So I've been using +Arch Linux this year.
Let's make it straight forward, if you're GEEKY enough, use +Arch Linux  or +Gentoo, if you're not, make yourself comfortable with some old-styled distributions or just buy an expensive Mac.
Je Li
i am using F19, it works FINE on old laptop (2011) ~~~
Agreed, I just got a new SSD for my old Thinkpad and spent an hour last night waiting for Fedora to download updates.
So..u are a Fedora guy after all :)
(Sorry I'm late to the party) So many people posting but not reading... Unfortunately I don't think +Linus Torvalds is going to get what he wants here, not when Fedora lacks any long term support. One has to wonder whether or not +Fedora Project is simply operating within the confines that a short-term release cycle and a monolithic kernel provides them? 
I used to use Fedora but I always had issues with it.  I am now using Xubuntu.   It works great on my laptop, in  VB on my Apple and as a main Desktop machine. has it's GUI bugs which can be quite annoying.  I suppose LTS would alleviate this but I like the latest updated shiiite.  Especially with Xfce, which has been traditionally a bit behind gnome 2.xx.  Xubuntu 13.10 sure screwed up Gedit.  They seem to make it worse on every revision.  Damn, I so hate Gnome 3.0.

  I am probably being a little off topic but I like hearing myself ramble. Lol.  
For what it is worth, and for everyone proposing a different distribution as a solution; the problem is not even unique to Linux, as a Dell desktop I freshly rebuilt with windows, using their provided recovery tools and that couldn't connect to the network, clearly shows.
Right now I think that Distros like SolydXK and Manjaro are the way to go. Easy to use, no headaches, and rolling release. I prefer SolydXK since it's Debian based, aesthetically pleasing for business use, and it just has that extra polish that most distros don't.
I have always wondered that myself. Why not every couple of months update .iso. At least the netinstall disk should definitely be updated frequent. I would also like to see longer support on every couple releases. This is the only thing I can say I like about Ubuntu. Also, going to Red Hat or something similar would put me in front of an ancient machine.
+Linus Torvalds I totally agree with your arguments. Some years ago I was so screwed and fucked up of those "We try to be a Distribution" that I ended up rollling my own one. LinuxfromScratch solved instantly my probs, self-compiling the new kernel each time with my only 3 versions (2 laptops+1 Desktop) makes it the best choice. 
But I remember to give also some credit to things like Debian for keeping it real and not shitting on others work.
Kind Regards
So that's why new kernels are constantly being installed! Here i was thinking it were critical security fixes. Why aren't updates modular?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but you can apply diff patches to your kernel to keep it up to date
I don't use Fedora anymore, took too much effort to get it working every time. 
FC20 is not great.
I just installed last week CentOS. I was shocked when I saw the installer, and especially the partitioner!
I just went 10 years back in time, several crashes.
The openSUSE Tumbleweed partition was shown about 50 times (like I had about 50 partitions).
You have 2 options, auto install and creating your own partition which is totally bugged.
It is one of the very few Linux installations which does not take into account that their are other Linux distributions. No Grub install on the partition to which you install Grub. You are forced to install Grub on the first sector boot partition.
Since CentOS is a stripped down version of Rhel I tried Oracle Linux Unbreakable which is almost a copy paste of Rhel.
Same installer like CentOS and I almost dropped of my chair, professional software offering this kind of crappy installer.
So I downloaded FC20 to see what is going on since everything is imported from FC into RHEL.
I had to see with my own eyes, and yes, same installer with the crappy partitioner.
FC20 for some reason I was unable to install because CentOS partition made FC20 installer crash.
I am just an average user. How do the folks of FC/CentOS try to reach common people like me with such software if you can not get it installed properly ? KISS principle like Ubuntu (most easy) or openSUSE best installer / partitioner ever.
Add a comment...