5 ms·

Fedora 32 is officially here

50 points by caution 6y ago

bsg75 6y ago
Running `dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=32` [1] now on a dev box, which leads me to a question: In trying rolling releases, namely Arch and the Manjaro derivative, I seem to have more upgrade version conflicts than I do with regular Fedora `dnf upgrade` and the bi-annual system upgrade. The Arch conflicts are often resolved by waiting a few days for the community fixes to the broken upgrade paths, because I don't use anything too rare. But given the relative popularity of the Arch approach, and the frequency of people who state anecdotally "I have never borked a system with pacman", but I seem to have the opposite experience, what are the real advantages to a rolling release compared to the Fedora approach? [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/ https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-u... https://fedoramagazine.org/upgrading-fedora-31-to-fedora-32/ https://fedoramagazine.org/upgrading-fedora-31-to-fedora-32/
- ATsch 6y ago
  I like that things might break two times a year, when I can prepare and set aside time for it, instead of randomly. I also like not having to check a website for any issues like one does with arch.
- loop0 6y ago
  Fedora is now a hybrid, some packages that are security sensitive are rolling, like kernel, web browsers, etc. And the ones that don’t need updates all the time are updated at releases. So it is the best of both worlds, things that matter are always updated while keeping overall system stability
- saghm 6y ago
  > In trying rolling releases, namely Arch and the Manjaro derivative, I seem to have more upgrade version conflicts than I do with regular Fedora `dnf upgrade` and the bi-annual system upgrade. It's possible I just happen to not be using the broken packages, but I've been using Arch as my daily driver for about six years now, and I've run into package conflicts when upgrading maybe once or twice. For me, having a package conflict once every three years or so (which as you say is generally resolved within a couple days) is worth immediately getting upgrades for everything on my system rather than having to wait for a new release of the OS itself. I also prefer not having the default desktop environment tied to the distro I'm using; although I do use Gnome, every distro I've tried out that has it pre-installed comes with a lot of extra stuff that I don't want installed, and even after removing it, some systems will reinstall most of it on OS upgrades. I completely understand the appeal of a distro that has explicit releases and comes working out-of-the-box, but it's just not something I want.
- brnt 6y ago
  Interesting to hear, because I used to hear the opposite: things like Nvidia drivers taking a month or two to be available in a new release. That has changed in Fedora?
Seirdy 6y ago
The changes I actually noticed: new versions of `zsh`, `curl`, Python, GCC, LLVM, kernel, and dnf. If you arent' using rolling modules, then you'll get a much newer version of Sway as well. The new version of DNF features colored output for more commands. The purge of stale python2 packages continues at a good pace. EarlyOOM has also arrived.
Lio 6y ago
So far this is release seems really good. Most of my experience is with Ubuntu but I'm really liking Fedora 32. Specifically I like the changes they've brought into Firefox; it's now using Wayland widgets by default and GPU acceleration with the Intel GPU that I have. Anecdotally there seems to be less latency than with my previous set up with Ubuntu 20.04LTS (don't put much store by that as it is just an anecdote for now). I also like the flicker free vendor boot screen. I carried out a fresh install. Everything was seamless and quick against an XPS13. It will be interesting to see what else is different between the two.
- echlebek 6y ago
  Here here! I upgraded from 31 with dnf. It resolved several issues I've been having with power, including the system not going to sleep and running itself out of battery with the lid closed, and also generally running too hot. It seemed like the fan was on constantly! I've got a newish Lenovo X1 Extreme, and I was starting to become frustrated with it before this release.
FullyFunctional 6y ago
A bummer. Fedora was one of the first to begin a RISC-V port, but there's no mention of it here, unlike for Ubuntu Focal.
brnt 6y ago
Still wont boot properly on Uefi whereas Ubuntu can. Why is that?

50 points by caution 6y ago

Running `dnf system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=32` [1] now on a dev box, which leads me to a question: In trying rolling releases, namely Arch and the Manjaro derivative, I seem to have more upgrade version conflicts than I do with regular Fedora `dnf upgrade` and the bi-annual system upgrade. The Arch conflicts are often resolved by waiting a few days for the community fixes to the broken upgrade paths, because I don't use anything too rare. But given the relative popularity of the Arch approach, and the frequency of people who state anecdotally "I have never borked a system with pacman", but I seem to have the opposite experience, what are the real advantages to a rolling release compared to the Fedora approach? [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-upgrade/ https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/dnf-system-u... https://fedoramagazine.org/upgrading-fedora-31-to-fedora-32/ https://fedoramagazine.org/upgrading-fedora-31-to-fedora-32/

ATsch 6y ago
I like that things might break two times a year, when I can prepare and set aside time for it, instead of randomly. I also like not having to check a website for any issues like one does with arch.
loop0 6y ago
Fedora is now a hybrid, some packages that are security sensitive are rolling, like kernel, web browsers, etc. And the ones that don’t need updates all the time are updated at releases. So it is the best of both worlds, things that matter are always updated while keeping overall system stability
saghm 6y ago
> In trying rolling releases, namely Arch and the Manjaro derivative, I seem to have more upgrade version conflicts than I do with regular Fedora `dnf upgrade` and the bi-annual system upgrade. It's possible I just happen to not be using the broken packages, but I've been using Arch as my daily driver for about six years now, and I've run into package conflicts when upgrading maybe once or twice. For me, having a package conflict once every three years or so (which as you say is generally resolved within a couple days) is worth immediately getting upgrades for everything on my system rather than having to wait for a new release of the OS itself. I also prefer not having the default desktop environment tied to the distro I'm using; although I do use Gnome, every distro I've tried out that has it pre-installed comes with a lot of extra stuff that I don't want installed, and even after removing it, some systems will reinstall most of it on OS upgrades. I completely understand the appeal of a distro that has explicit releases and comes working out-of-the-box, but it's just not something I want.
brnt 6y ago
Interesting to hear, because I used to hear the opposite: things like Nvidia drivers taking a month or two to be available in a new release. That has changed in Fedora?

Seirdy 6y ago

The changes I actually noticed: new versions of `zsh`, `curl`, Python, GCC, LLVM, kernel, and dnf. If you arent' using rolling modules, then you'll get a much newer version of Sway as well. The new version of DNF features colored output for more commands. The purge of stale python2 packages continues at a good pace. EarlyOOM has also arrived.

Lio 6y ago

So far this is release seems really good. Most of my experience is with Ubuntu but I'm really liking Fedora 32. Specifically I like the changes they've brought into Firefox; it's now using Wayland widgets by default and GPU acceleration with the Intel GPU that I have. Anecdotally there seems to be less latency than with my previous set up with Ubuntu 20.04LTS (don't put much store by that as it is just an anecdote for now). I also like the flicker free vendor boot screen. I carried out a fresh install. Everything was seamless and quick against an XPS13. It will be interesting to see what else is different between the two.

echlebek 6y ago
Here here! I upgraded from 31 with dnf. It resolved several issues I've been having with power, including the system not going to sleep and running itself out of battery with the lid closed, and also generally running too hot. It seemed like the fan was on constantly! I've got a newish Lenovo X1 Extreme, and I was starting to become frustrated with it before this release.

FullyFunctional 6y ago

A bummer. Fedora was one of the first to begin a RISC-V port, but there's no mention of it here, unlike for Ubuntu Focal.

brnt 6y ago

Still wont boot properly on Uefi whereas Ubuntu can. Why is that?