Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released 466
qurob was the first of many readers to submit
that Red Hat 7.3 has been released.
Press release doesn't contain any surprises, just lists a bunch of stuff thats
included with the dist. (Evolution, Mozilla, Apache). So go find a mirror if
you're a Red Hat runner. Update: 05/06 14:05 GMT by T : christooley helpfully points out this list of mirrors.
KDE3 (Score:3, Interesting)
you'd think they would have touted kde3 a bit more instead of putting it at the bottom of the list. isn't this the first major distro to ship with the newest version of kde?
and is not nor will be downloadable for a while (Score:1, Interesting)
Hmmm. I wonder if they are going to pull a Suse and not offer iso's anymore.
A Question (Score:5, Interesting)
It has been our policy at work for some time now to grab whatever the latest release is, run up2date on it, and modify a CD image of the old CD so it has the new RPMs.
Is this prevalent? Will it become more so?
Jouster
Excellent (Score:0, Interesting)
For all my mission critical systems I always deploy RedHat Linux, coupled with the excellent EXT2 filesystem and MySQL.
Beat my uptime! [netcraft.com]
Re:Whats new Link (Score:2, Interesting)
x.3 release (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:From looking at the release notes (Score:2, Interesting)
I had been applying the preemptive kernel patches, which improved things a little, but still left GUI response jerky (completely subjective on my part). The 2.4.18-ish kernels in the 7.3 beta didn't have this responsiveness problem at all.
So, if you aren't into rolling your own kernels, and you frequently find your CPU load higher than 1, the upgrade may be worth it for you for that alone.
And including the new Emacs!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What, no Red Hat 8.0? (Score:1, Interesting)
Also, I wonder what SuSE and Mandrake will do when they release version 10 en 1,5 years
Should they start from 1.0 again? Or go for the HPUX way?
up2date from 7.2 to 7.3? (Score:3, Interesting)
I've been meaning to upgrade to KDE3, even have the RPMs, but up2date works so much better.
Marketing this (Score:1, Interesting)
I have been involved in the marketing (dirty word I know!) of software and hardware to non-technical people for a number of years. The consultancy group I work for numbers many of America's top blue-chip electronics and software corporations among its clients, I have over 11 years experience of marketing, and 4 years experience of software development (VB) and systems administration (NT 3.51), in addition to a marketing science qualification from one of America's top business schools - so it's safe to say that I know what I am talking about when it comes to computers and marketing.
I have been keeping an eye this forum for quite some time now, as part of my daily intelligence gathering, I find the robust exchange of views, and technical arguments make an interesting diversion from some of the other corporate bullshit I have to deal with in my working day. I also read corporate intelligence reports from the Gartner group, Forrester, the Meta group, and Olsen Online Business Intelligence Services. Slashdot has often proved to be far more accurate when it comes to the technical details,and I am often amazed at the incredible levels of intelligence and insight shown by its readership, some of whom demonstrate a knowledge of Linux and Operating systems far in advance of anyone I have ever met, even in the IS department of major corporations. For this reason, I feel I should contribute my 2c to the debate about the future direction of Linux and the whole Open Source movement in general.
I feel I can do my bit for the Open Source community by offering (free of charge) some of my hard-earned knowledge straight from the bloody trenches at the front-line of tech-Marketing. Normally I would be paid over $4000/day for my perspective, but Slashdot - this one's on me. You people can think of it as my small and unworthy attempt to "give something back" to the Community.
Why Linux/Open Source has an image problem in major US Corporations and what the community can do about it. Like any movment, political or religious, Open Source/Linux has its Leaders, High priests and Gurus. These high profile individuals represent the public face of the organization. Like it or not, these people are associated with the product in the eyes of the buying public. One of the first things the Linux movement must do in order to gain acceptence by middle-America and Joe-and-Jean Sixpack and their 2.4 kids, is to develop what we in the Marketing profession call a "Happy Face".
When Joe Sixpack drives past a McDonald's, he associates it with the smiling face of Ronald McDonald the clown,and quality food served quickly. When he is choosing a collect-call company, the smiling face of Al Bundy (of TV's Married with Children) springs to mind, and when he thinks of fried chicken in large capacity bucket-like containers, it is the image of the happy-go-lucky avuncular Colonel with his associations of good old Southern hospitality that sticks in his memory. (In marketing terms this is known as a "positive association". Because the image puts the consumer into a "buying-receptive" mental state).
Linux/Open Source lacks any kind of "Happy Face". Now this in itself is not a problem, were it not for the fact that Linux has several extremely high-profile advocates who are the exact opposite of "Happy Faces" in that they invite negative associations into the consumers head and put him/ her into a state known by Marketers as "passive-aggressive sales-message rejection" (In layman's terms they don't want to buy the product).
Now, I will not lower the tone of the debate by naming names. I will give a few brief profiles and community members will know who I am talking about.
In reverse order of harmfullness we have the laconic, dour nothern European. Not known for his sense of hunor, and with far too many nights spent coding when he should have been out partying he creates an image of Linux as the OS of choice for "friendless geeks who never got laid". (note - I do not subscribe to this viewpoint, but trust me some of my focus group members do).
Then we have the good old gun-toting libertarian self-proclaimed open source guru. Although M.R. studies show that 78% of PC owners show right-wing bias this person is too wacko and off-the scale for them. He alienates them, and in the worst case scares them that they risk being physically harmed if they don't agree with his fundamentalist libertarian "philosophy".
Finally we have a bearded Communist hippy. Do I need to say any more ?
So the normal consumer associates Linux with a sucicidal friendless nerd from some godforsaken corner of Northern Europe, a plainly insane right wing lunatic, and an "alternative lifestyle" Communist throwback to Woodstock with a facial hair problem. Is it any wonder that time after time, the message comes back from my focus groups that Linux is for wierdos ?
Here are a few example comments from a focus group session from Q3 1999 in response to a question about their attitudes to Linux and open source software, you'll get the general idea.
"Linux - that's that geek system right ?"
"I tried Linux but it was too hard for me to install, then that guy flamed me on the newsgroups"
"I don't want any Open Source software because it is written by communists and I am concerned about security"
"My boss says Linux was written by Communists and Gun-Nuts"
"Linux is used by Communists who hate capitalism and Microsoft"
"Open source software cannot be any good because it is written by college students and hackers."
"Linux is not compatible with my USB peripherals"
"I would like to try Linux but my buddies would think I was a Commie"
I could go on and on with these genuine responses, but I think I've illustrated my point well enough. Linux has a serious image problem.
What to do about it is more problematic. Open Source proponents and Linux advocates are fiercely independent and proud of their alternative stance. They see any form of marketing as "selling out to da man" or "not groking it" or becoming a "suit" Any mention of money or financial rewards is derided, and developers are supposed to be content with "Kudos" from the community. Whilst this might be ok at college, or if you are tremendously wealthy, it cuts no ice with Joe Sixpack who was raised on Microsoft and associates Bill's millions with the quality of the software his company puts out. From the focus group again:
"If Bill (Gates) is worth that much money he must make the best software in the world."
"Microsoft must know what they are doing - the whole world uses their software."
"The best programmers work for Microsoft - they have the most tech-savvy hackers there."
"Microsoft spend millions on their software I think it is the best in the world. (referring to IE5)
Again the message is clear: Microsoft is winning the hearts and minds not only of Joe Sixpack, but also Juan Sixpack in South America, Jean-Paul Sixpack in France, Jeroen Van der Sixpack in the Netherlands, Nkwele-Olamu Sixpack in West Africa, Mohammed-Al-Sixpack in Iran, Kulwant Chandrasekhera Sixpack in India, and Boris Sixpack in the Russian Federation.
Their message is powerful, international, and presented relentlessly with no internal bickering and bitching.
What can be done ?
There are no easy answers. The Linux/Open Source community has proved unwilling or unable to accept critisim (even constructive criticism such as this) gracefully, preferring to mount foul-languaged assaults on the personal integrity of anyone who steps out from the party line.
I offer no easy solutions, however here are a few pointers:
1) As a damage limitation exercise Linux/GNU should appoint itself a "Marketing Spokesperson". This person would be the "official face of Linux/ GNU/Open Source". First and Foremost, they would wear an expensive suit, especially when talking to the press or when dealing with high-profile major corporation with deep pockets and $$$s to spend. I realise this is ridiculous from a technical perspective, but with my blend of tech-savvy and marketing exprience, I realize the importance of presentation over technical merit. It goes against the grain of the community, but if we are to become the next Microsoft (and why else would we be in this game if not to win it at all costs), we must fight them on our battleground, but with the same weapons they use against us.
2) The Penguin logo MUST go ASAP. Although it seemed "cute" and funny at the time, in the eyes of the corporate MIS department it just looks juvenile. Linux needs a new logo, preferably one of those kind of eliptical ones with a swoosh that in the eyes of the public can mean one thing: Hip and cool DOTCOM Corporation. The logo should be bland, yet robust, non-controversial yet ahead of the curve, and toned in serious businesslike colors such as gray, silver, and white. It should transcend culture and religion to be internationally recognized like the Coca-Cola image is all over the world.
3) Downplay RMS, Linus, ESR, etc. They are technicians with zero understanding of the general public, or of software consumers in general. Indeed many of them only write their program for themselves to "scratch an itch". This is hardly the way to gain public acceptance.
4) Direct X - A MAJOR stumbling block on Linux's road to world domination is the lack of Direct X support for Linux. This trivial omission means that most games will not run on Linux. Linux could gain 1000's of new games by simply implementing the DirectX api. This is a no-brainer. Kernel support for XML would be a big performance booster too in the B2B and B2C application area, and would make Linux buzzword compliant for XML.
5) Finally FOCUS GROUPS. Before you think about starting that new open-source project, (be it a new web browser like Mazola, or simply a new front-end for the cdplayer application) Get a focus group together. Use a few minutes of your non-tech-savvy friend's time. If you don't have any friends like that, try your folks, or your grandparents. Ask them what they would like to see in your new program. This way, you will gain "market perspective" on the likely acceptance of your product by the "normal people" of the world.
thank you for your time
Which VM? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:From looking at the release notes (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:pattern also seems to follow kernel versions (Score:2, Interesting)
Red Hat release numbers indicate the version of the C library (for binary-compatibility) - like so:
Re:Old version of Mozilla? (Score:5, Interesting)
OpenOffice 1.0 was released way too late to get through the QA process (can't reveal the schedule of course, but take a look at the changelogs in packages to get an idea about when the release had to be deep-frozen
There are a couple of other things that prevent it from getting into Rawhide at the moment.
Off the top of my head (there are probably some more):
These are all fixable because it's Open Source, but they require a considerable amount of time.
Also, the database application is missing (because it couldn't be relicensed), and some people depend on it.
I'm expecting OpenOffice in the base distribution in the next release... But this is not an official statement and much less a promise.
Re:Mandrake too... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:gcc-2.96 (Score:5, Interesting)
Earlier versions than 2.96 are not an option because they don't do real C++ (see http://www.bero.org/gcc296.html [bero.org]).
3.0.x releases are rather broken and don't have any real advantages over the current builds of 2.96.
gcc 3.1 will be a very good release, even better than 2.96. It is what we're likely to use in the next major release (unless, of course, gcc 3.2 comes first and is good).
Re:Does the distribution still include Netscape? (Score:4, Interesting)
The part I'm referring to is this:
2. License to Distribute Software. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including, but not limited to Section 4 (Java Technology Restrictions) of these Supplemental Terms, Sun grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to reproduce and distribute the Software, provided that (i) you distribute the Software complete and unmodified (unless otherwise specified in the applicable README file) and only bundled as part of, and for the sole purpose of running, your Programs, (ii) the Programs add significant and primary functionality to the Software, (iii) you do not distribute additional software intended to replace any component(s) of the Software (unless otherwise specified in the applicable README file), (iv) you do not remove or alter any proprietary legends or notices contained in the Software, (v) you only distribute the Software subject to a license agreement that protects Sun's interests consistent with the terms contained in this Agreement, and (vi) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities, settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third party that arises or results from the use or distribution of any and all Programs and/or Software. (vi) include the following statement as part of product documentation (whether hard copy or electronic), as a part of a copyright page or proprietary rights notice page, in an "About" box or in any other form reasonably designed to make the statement visible to users of the Software: "This product includes code licensed from RSA Security, Inc.", and (vii) include the statement, "Some portions licensed from IBM are available at http://oss.software.ibm.com/icu4j/".
IANAL, but for me, this implies:
Re:Kernel hacks, kjournald (Score:3, Interesting)
It has some major problems including a remote root exploit. Please upgrade to either the 7.2 errata kernel, 2.4.9-something, which fixes all known security problems, or the 7.3 kernel.
So there are two possibilities:
1) fsked up my 2.4.18 config, and thus ended up compiling a really crappy kernel. But I've been compiling kernels since 1.2.13, and have yet to have one behave anywhere NEAR this badly.
2) RH have significantly hacked 2.4.7 to make it useful. Does anyone know whether the same hacks have happened for the 7.3 kernel?
2, and possibly 1 as well.
Red Hat kernels are always patched quite a bit to make them more stable/usable, but 2.4.18 doesn't look THAT bad for me (maybe related to different hardware or different setups).
Since kjournald appears to be the culprit, the Red Hat version of 2.4.18 is likely to fix the problem because it uses a newer version of ext3 and everything related to it.