|
|
发表于 2008-6-23 22:33:33
|
显示全部楼层
From Fedora 9 to openSUSE 11.0
From Fedora 9 to openSUSE 11.0
 Those among you who read DistroWatch Weekly with religious regularity probably remember that your DistroWatch maintainer tends to switch his primary distribution every six months. This is mostly the result of wanting to follow the current trends in different distributions and to remain as objective as possible when comparing and evaluating different products. Having just completed some six months on Fedora 8 and 9, it was thus time to pick a new distro for my main workstation. The result? This issue of DistroWatch Weekly is the first of many that has been put together on openSUSE 11.0.
Before taking a first look at Novell's community distribution, let me start with a few remarks on Fedora's last two releases. It seems to be a trend among Linux distributions that an excellent release is often followed by a mediocre one. It's as if the distribution developers became complacent after one or two successful versions, thinking that nothing could possible go wrong six months down the line. As such, they get more adventurous, make wrong decisions, and add experimental features, the combination of which is often disastrous. With Fedora 9, I feel that the developers have negated all the great work they had done with previous 2 - 3 releases and went overboard with bleeding-edge software and features. No wonder Fedora 9 received barely a lukewarm reception by most reviewers, while many users were much less kind in their choice of words when describing their own experiences.
My sentiments are no different from those expressed in many recent reviews. Fedora 8 was possibly the project's best release to-date - certainly not without its problems, but generally trouble-free, especially after the first waves of post-release bug fixes and software updates were applied to the distribution. On the other hand, Fedora 9 barely qualifies as a stable release. The decision to provide KDE 4 as the only KDE desktop was a painfully wrong one, particularly at the time when the vocal Fedora KDE team has been campaigning hard to convince the Linux community that Fedora was not a GNOME distro any more. And shipping a version of X.Org that did not work with any of the proprietary NVIDIA drivers also must have cost the distribution a few users.
It wasn't just KDE 4 that made Fedora 9 a buggy and feature-incomplete operating system. During my use of the product I also encountered a number of other annoyances, among which a failure to find the CD/DVD burner (a reboot would fix the issue, at least for a while) was most unpleasant. My Nikon Coolpix camera, which was detected fine in Fedora 8, no longer worked in Fedora 9 (I had to remove the SD card and plug it into a USB card reader in order to extract the content). And last week's software update, which brought over 200 new package versions into Fedora 9, broke my GRUB (I had to reboot into a live CD in order to re-instate the bootloader). All these little troubles suggest that Fedora 9 does not only suffer from wrong design choices, but also from lack of quality control during beta testing and post-release updates.
So shortly after last week's release of openSUSE 11.0, I made a decision to dedicate my second hard disk to what promised to be one of the most ambitious products of the just-concluded distro release season. Let's face it - both Mandriva Linux 2008.1 and Ubuntu 8.04 were fairly conservative releases, making them look like minor updates rather than major new distribution versions (I don't mean this in a negative way, on the contrary). Fedora went the other direction, putting every conceivable new feature and unstable software into its development tree. Although the openSUSE developers did largely the same, they have also given themselves a much longer development period. The presence of several prominent KDE developers on the openSUSE team has also raised the confidence level as to the KDE 4 implementation in the distribution. And while KDE 4 is the default KDE in openSUSE 11.0, KDE 3.5 and its components are thankfully available in the distribution's repositories and can be installed with just a few mouse clicks.
One non-technical problem with openSUSE 11.0 is, of course, Novell's infamous patent protection deal with Microsoft, which continues to be a hotly debated topic in DistroWatch Weekly forums week after week. One thing is clear, however; although the people who continue to campaign for boycotting Novell's products are extremely vocal, they are clearly in minority. An indication of this is the interest last week's release of openSUSE 11.0 generated here on DistroWatch. It is illustrated in the table below, which ranks the major distribution releases according to the number of unique hits their respective pages received during the first three days after the release. As can be seen, with over 16,500 unique hits, openSUSE 11.0 is second only to Ubuntu in terms of post-release interest in the distribution among the DistroWatch visitors.
Rank Distribution ...... Release date ..Hits
1 ... Ubuntu 8.04 ......... 2008-04-24 ...19,236
2 ... openSUSE 11.0 ....... 2008-06-19 ...16,513
3 ... Fedora 9 ............ 2008-05-13 ...13,408
4 ... Mandriva Linux 2008.1 2008-04-09... 9,700
5 ... Linux Mint 5 ........ 2008-06-08 ... 8,058
6 ... Slackware Linux 12.1 .2008-05-02 ... 4,671
7 ... FreeBSD 7.0 ......... 2008-02-27 ... 3,312
So what were the first few days of openSUSE 11.0 like? My first impressions are much more positive than the first few days on Fedora 9; I spent much of them migrating data and settings, and configuring the user interface the way that makes me productive. One of the most pleasant surprises that won me over was the inclusion of Konqueror 3 in the default installation. This simple trick that Fedora failed to spot makes it possible to stay with KDE 4 as the default desktop, but still enjoy the goodness and flexibility of KDE 3.5 wherever KDE 4 doesn't cut in. Let's be honest about it, in terms of features and customisation options, both Dolphin and Konqueror 4 file managers are very poor substitutes for the excellent Konqueror in KDE 3.5.
I was also pleasantly surprised by the improvements in YaST and package management, especially its speed. The last time I used openSUSE extensively was in 2002, but even the more recent reviews continued to express dissatisfaction with the general speed of the distribution's administration and package management utilities. Clearly, the developers have listened to their users and have made massive efforts to address this issue. On my x86_64 system, software installation with YaST2 wasn't any slower than that using any of the Fedora package management utilities, while booting is also much speedier than was the case in previous versions of openSUSE. As I had used the live CD to install the operating system, I spent considerable time tormenting the openSUSE package management utilities, but apart from an occasional failed connection to an overcrowded mirror, I had no problems installing and uninstalling applications. Installing proprietary and non-free ones, as well as adding video card drivers and media support to openSUSE 11.0 was surprisingly intuitive and straightforward. Even third-party applications, such as Opera 9.50 and the latest Google Earth, all worked without any problems.
Overall, I am pleasantly surprised with openSUSE 11.0. Perhaps the only area where it lacks in comparison with Fedora 9 is its font setup; on my LCD monitor I find the default fonts looking absolutely gorgeous on all recent Fedora and Mandriva releases, but it takes a lot of experimentation and tweaking on most other distribution to get the same effect. Other than that, openSUSE 11.0 looks good and feels solid, and I expect being a satisfied openSUSE user for the next six months.
What are your experiences with openSUSE 11.0? Please discuss below.
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20080623#news |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡
