On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 10:37:37 -0600, hbrhodes wrote: > anyone think or know if it is worth upgrading to FC5 from FC4? > > is it more worthwhile to do it a clean install? My experience of FC4 to FC5... Broke my sound card. Random lock ups whenever sound was used and a syslogd message telling me that interrupt 17 has been disabled-- re-installing the latest FC4 kernel sorts it out. So somebody has broken the sound. Graphics performance seems sluggish... I thought GNOME 2.14 had some serious performance improvements, but not so as I noticed. Perhaps they have all been drained away by Cairo. That's after I got X working again, since right after installing, X failed to start saying it couldn't find fonts. I've just done a yum upgrade, and upgraded gconf -- and now gconf-editor crashes. Metacity now starts any apps *behind* the gnome-terminal window it was launched from. Why? Who knows? I gave up trying to understand the logic behind Metacity's configuration choices. I ended up disabling SELinux. I've put up with it since it was introduced, but with another long list of "denied" messages when I started FC5, I decided I'd had enough. Less secure? Possibly, but I'd run out of patience with cryptic failures and picking through dmesg and audit2why etc. wget/curl/yum all failed to work unless directed through privoxy. I had no idea why until someone mentioned that something similar had happened to them. I moved /etc/nsswitch.conf and they worked again. An "rpm -qf /etc/nsswitch.conf" revealed that it belong to glibc. I reinstalled that and everything still worked. There was no /etc/nsswitch.rpmnew/rpmsave... and I've never modified the file -- I didn't even know what it did. My verdict,... well... disappointing. I'd have put up with the oddness and breakages had I seen the performance improvements I was hoping for with GNOME... but I didn't. And all in all, I have to say that I wish I'd stayed with FC4.
