Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Red Hat Software Businesses

Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released 466

Posted by CmdrTaco from the download-da-distribution dept.
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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released More

Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released

Comments Filter:

  • KDE3 (Score:3, Interesting)

    by magicslax ( 532351 ) <{frank_salim} {at} {yahoo.com}> on Monday May 06, 2002 @08:58AM (#3469224)

    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?

    • Re:KDE3 (Score:4, Insightful)

      by GrenDel Fuego ( 2558 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:01AM (#3469239)
      Suse 8.0 includes KDE 3.0, and was released last month.
      • Mandrake unleased their crazy KDE lovin' [linux-mandrake.com] upon an unsuspecting public on April 23rd. Red Hat is just following the trend.

        Its not that big of a feature to the GNOMEish, but I 'll give KDE 3 a shot when I rebuild my dev box with RH7.3 today. I'm not a big fan of KDE, and each time I try it, I fail to be suitably impressed. Maybe 3 will change all that =)

        • Re:Mandrake too... (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Cro Magnon ( 467622 )
          Didn't Mandrake ship with KDE 2.2.2, saying that KDE 3 was too unstable? And if Mandrake thought it was unstable, do you really want to use it?
          • Yes, 8.2 didn't ship with KDE 3. They have recently released packages for KDE 3 separately. Personally, I don't want to use it for a production workstation, and I don't intend to. I tend to stick to GNOME/Sawfish or GNOME/Enlightenment.

    • Re:KDE3 (Score:3, Funny)

      by Mandi Walls ( 6721 )
      eh, they're a buncha crazy gnome freaks.

      bastards like python, too.

      may as well just put hot pokers in my eyes.

      --mandi
      (fan of purple linux...)

    • Actually, SuSE 8.0 ships since a couple of weeks with KDE3. So, no, Red Hat isn't the first one to ship with KDE3. I don't know if there are other distro's shipping with KDE3...
      • I installed SuSE 8.0 on my PII Celeron 333. KDE3 rocks on it. I installed Mosfet's Liquid theme (http://www.mosfet.org/liquid) and I just love it. Snappy, fun, all that. Like having Aqua without the need for expensive hardware. Yummy.

  • Whats new Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by bruceg ( 14365 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @08:58AM (#3469227) Homepage
    HERE [redhat.com] is a link to whats new in this release.

  • Oh brother... (Score:2, Offtopic)

    by Linux Freak ( 18608 )

    Just great, now my LAME Guide [linuxninja.com] is even _MORE_ out of date. ;^)

  • Nice spoiler, jerk! (Score:5, Funny)

    by PD ( 9577 ) <slashdotlinux@pdrap.org> on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:00AM (#3469236) Homepage Journal
    Press release doesn't contain any surprises, just lists a bunch of stuff thats included with the dist. (Evolution, Mozilla, Apache)

    Well thanks a lot, jerk. Some of us in California haven't even had a chance to read it yet, and you've given away the ending. Didn't the negative feedback from the Lone Gunmen snafu teach you anything?

    Sheesh!

  • A Question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Jouster ( 144775 ) <<moc.qaflegna> <ta> <todhsals>> on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:02AM (#3469247) Homepage Journal
    With up2date, how much longer can RedHat release CDs?

    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

    • Re:A Question (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tuffy ( 10202 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:40AM (#3469490) Homepage Journal
      With up2date, how much longer can RedHat release CDs?

      As long as the majority of RedHat users don't have high speed internet access, CDs are still a viable method of distribution. The bandwidth of a box full of RedHat CDs in the trunk of my car is a helluva lot more than anything a measly 56k modem can provide, that's for sure...

      • The bandwidth of a box full of RedHat CDs in the trunk of my car is a helluva lot more than anything a measly 56k modem can provide, that's for sure...

        But the latency, the latency... You need a bike [gpz1100.com]. :-)

  • Mirrors are found :-) (Score:5, Informative)

    by French Thias ( 188992 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:05AM (#3469270) Homepage

    I've put up a list of mirror servers that are known to be fully synced with the release here :

    http://freshrpms.net/mirrors/valhalla.html [freshrpms.net]

    I've also already rebuilt a pre-configured apt and its reposiroty for use with Valhalla, as well as many custom packages (lame, gkrellm, glimmer, nessus, xmame...)

    Having already tested it a bit, I must say this release looks darn good and stable so far! Maybe it's because there are fewer changes than usual (which explains this being 7.3 and not 8.0).

    Matthias

  • x.3 release (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Goronguer ( 223202 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:13AM (#3469334)
    This may be a minor point, but Red Hat deserves credit for calling this release "7.3" instead of "8.0". Especially when their pattern for years now has been x.0, x.1, x.2, x+1.0..., it shows admirable restraint for them to break the pattern and resist the temptation to call this a major-version release, when it is in fact an update release. Let's hear it for truth in advertising!

    • Who cares? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by glrotate ( 300695 )
      They could call it 7.2345346 or 56.8. I think most Gnu/Linux users try to be a bit more rational than to worry about whatever version number they decide to slap on it.

      I think Red Hat should be given credit based on the quality of the release, not the version number.
      • It may not make a difference to current GnuLiX users, but it does to those who aren't.

        I remember thinking Patrick Volkerding was a schmutz for coming out with Slackware 7.0, until several months ago when I heard at Fry's: "No dude! Get this Manhat 7.1, it's newer than that Redrake 7.0 you've got in your hands."
    • They just realized that most people hear ".0" and think "unstable".
    • Doesn't Red Hat only increment the major version number when there is a "major" compiler version change? If so, then they're just following their normal practices which I suppose is a good thing.
      • Might just be coincidence with the compiler/binary compatability thing, but it seems that major RH releases also track kernel versions:

        RH 5.x - kernel 2.0.x
        RH 6.x - kernel 2.2.x
        RH 7.x - kernel 2.4.x
        • Both of you got it wrong!
          Red Hat release numbers indicate the version of the C library (for binary-compatibility) - like so:
          • 4.x - libc5
          • 5.x - glibc2.0
          • 6.x - glibc2.1
          • 7.x - glibx2.2
          • 8.x - go figure!...

          • Re:pattern also seems to follow kernel versions (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Papineau ( 527159 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @11:15AM (#3470288) Homepage
            Don't forget the version of the C++ compiler. I don't have the different version numbers shipped with the different distributions, but from one version to the other the ABI (application binary compatibility) is not guaranteed, if not plain absent.

            IE, you can't link some part of a C++ program compiled with gcc-2.95.3 with some other compiled with gcc 3.0, although you can do the same thing with a C program.

            I think the compiler thing will be one of the major compatibility changes for RH 8.0.

            (And damn them, I left my dorm room last week!)
    • Red Hat change the major version number when they break binary compatibility. Since 7.3 is binary compatible with 7.0, they didn't go to 8.0

  • From looking at the release notes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wiredog ( 43288 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:17AM (#3469368) Journal
    It seems that if you have RH7.2 and you have run up2date weekly you have everything except for Moz, kde3, Evolution, and some gnome collab app. Since I've been running kde 3 since the release and have Moz 1.0-RC1, I see no need to download the ISO's.
    • I've noticed a serious improvment in kernel interactivity. GUI applications on the 2.4.9-ish kernels that Red Hat was shipping for 7.2 ran like a dog whenever I tried to run a build or two of a large software project in the background.

      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.
      • I have had exactly the opposite experience. RH 7.2 (2.5.7-10 IIRC) with ext3 is snappy and responsive, even under the heavy cpu and i/o load of a background kernel compile.

        But I wanted ALSA, so I grabbed 2.4.18, and installed that. It is absoultely HORRIBLE. With any sort of i/o in the background, the mouse is laggy, GUI latency can be measured in large fractions (and sometimes numbers of) seconds. top This is for exactly the same setup otherwise. Low latency patches don't help much. maybe a little, but it still is unacceptably laggy. Forget xmms + pan (one program to feed the other :-)) at the same time.

        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?

        Thoughts?
        • Oh just to add:

          It appears to be orthogonal to memory pressure, but related to i/o. Running top suggests that kjournald is the culprit, as it both sucks up a (comparatively) large fraction of cpu time and % (low single digits under i/o load), in addition to bing near the top of the runq when UI lag sucks most.
        • First of all, don't use 2.4.7-anything.
          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.
    • 7.3 is apparently still packaged [redhat.com] with the vulnerable [securityfocus.com] zlib 1.1.3 version.
    • You can use red-carpet if you are GNOME user to get Mozilla, Evolution, and other updates.

    • It seems that if you have RH7.2 and you have run up2date weekly you have everything except for Moz, kde3, Evolution, and some gnome collab app.

      That's not entirely true...
      The 7.2 is aka "Enigma" where as the 7.3 is a lot cooler "Valhalla". If that's not a reason to upgrade then nothing is.

      (I'm still sad that I had to update away from the "Guinness")

  • Try it in Test Drive (Score:5, Informative)

    by Test Drive ( 236441 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @09:24AM (#3469415) Homepage
    I have our Red Hat Test Drive system updated now to Red Hat 7.3. As always, accounts [compaq.com] with us are free, and you get access to a number of different systems [compaq.com]. Try out the latest releases of operating systems on our hardware before you commit it to your own!
  • If someone could help me check out my bandwidth that would be great:

    http://toughguy.caltech.edu/pub/linux/redhat/lin ux / .3/

    thanks,
    chad
  • I know they've switched over to Mozilla (a move I wholeheartedly agree with), but I was wondering if they still ship with Netscape as well (at least for this release).
    • It's still included.

      Both Konqueror and Mozilla are better for most stuff by now, but unfortunately, Netscape 4.x is still the only browser that does Java without the need of shipping a not legally redistributable JDK.

  • up2date from 7.2 to 7.3? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ceswiedler ( 165311 ) <chris@swiedler.org> on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:10AM (#3469701)
    Is is possible (and easy) to use up2date to upgrade from 7.2 to 7.3, at least for certain packages like KDE?

    I've been meaning to upgrade to KDE3, even have the RPMs, but up2date works so much better.

    • Re:up2date from 7.2 to 7.3? (Score:4, Informative)

      by Menthos ( 25332 ) <`menthos' `at' `gnu.org'> on Monday May 06, 2002 @11:33AM (#3470423) Homepage
      Some say it's possible to use up2date for upgrading by tweaking /etc/redhat-release to the new value, thus tricking up2date in the next run to upgrade the whole distro. I haven't tried it myself.

      The easiest and supported way of upgrading from one release to another is of course using the installer. Just get the cd:s, pop them in and select "upgrade existing install". This is supported and will also take care of interrelease changes (like boot loader change, ext3 migration etc.), which most hacks for upgrading that only updates packages won't. Granted, there seems to be few of those changes this time, but I'd recommend the CD upgrade method any day.

      • Some say it's possible to use up2date for upgrading by tweaking /etc/redhat-release to the new value, thus tricking up2date in the next run to upgrade the whole distro. I haven't tried it myself.

        I've upgraded an abundance of boxes that way, although no tweaking necessary. I've just fetched the redhat-release .noarch.rpm from some ftp site and the let up2date take over.

        There have been minor issues here and there, which have forced me to download and upgrade some of the new rpms manually, but it's been really nonissue. I've done this since 7.0beta and as soon as the up2date is open for non subscribers loads of boxes here will go from "Enigma" or "Skipjack" (7.3beta) to "Valhalla".

        That way you'll avoid letting their installer do it's trickery. I've had few pretty fscked-up experiences with the cd upgrades.

  • Which VM? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tholti ( 544938 )
    Does anybody know which VM (AA's or RvR's) is used in the accompaning 2.4.18 kernel? Alan Cox is using the RvR-VM in his ac-branch, so Red Hat Linux 7.3?

  • How is KDE3 running? (Score:3, Informative)

    by ChrisWong ( 17493 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:26AM (#3469807) Homepage
    I have been underwhelmed by Red Hat's packaging of KDE in the past. For example, in a boxed release (either 7.1 or 7.2), kdehelp's "back" and "forward" buttons didn't work. When KDE 2.2.2 RPMs were released, they helpfully included (and required) a version of Qt that froze the desktop: I had to disable klipper. The current KDE3 RPMs for RH 7.2 from Red Hat have their own glitches: ksplash goes kblooie at startup, and konqueror seems to have this big memory leak that bloats its footprint over time. I wonder if anyone at Red Hat even tries to use KDE.

    How is KDE3 running on RH 7.3? Does Konq still have that memory leak?

  • Instant ISOs available (Score:5, Informative)

    by neuroid ( 6952 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @10:46AM (#3469999)
    If you shell out some cash for RHN [redhat.com], they have 'Instant ISOs' available.

    Much faster than the mirrors I've tried - check it out.

  • When RedHat will switch from gcc-2.96 to something else? That's the only reason for me to install Slackware instead RH/MDK.
    • Probably in their next revision (8.0). Actually, they ship it right now, as gcc3 packages rather than gcc-3. So if you want to use it, you can. Their testing must have shown that gcc 2.96-RH is the one they want to ship right now.

      If they change their default compiler to gcc 3.x, then they'll up the version to 8.0 because that new compiler (mostly the C++ compiler, but maybe the Java one also) won't be binary compatible with the previous one.

      And if that's the only reason for you, why don't you give it a go yourself? It's pretty easy to do, especially if your second choice of distro is Slackware rather than say Suse or even Debian.

    • Re:gcc-2.96 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by bero-rh ( 98815 ) <bero@reCOMMAdhat.com minus punct> on Monday May 06, 2002 @12:43PM (#3470974) Homepage
      There's not much of a problem with 2.96.

      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).
  • I am happy with my 7.1 and 7.2 installations. I do a lot of updating with programs I use like OpenOffice, GKrellM, Lopster, GNOME, KDE (KDE3 now) etc.

    Are there anything in 7.3 worth that will want me to upgrade? From what I saw, nothing is really new except updated components. I will install 7.3 from scratch if I ever had to reinstall due to a HDD failure or something.

    Thank you in advance. :)

  • yeah redhat network... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Polo ( 30659 ) on Monday May 06, 2002 @12:05PM (#3470687) Homepage
    So I guess joining the redhat network worked out pretty well. I'm downloading the iso images in parallel at the capacity of my cable modem.
  • I have a strange track record. I don't *need* a linux box but I like to keep one running for web serving, ftp, a router, etc. This means that some times I have to pull hardware from the box for other necesities. Well, yesterday I finally got the box back up and running (and much more powerful then it was in its last conception). I installed and have throughly updated Redhat 7.2. Now, 7.3 comes out.

    This has happened to me for every major . release since 6.0! I sware, if you want the next version of redhat, I just need to install it and update it. Pfft!

  • Mirror in Europe (Score:2, Informative)

    by Yenya ( 12004 )
    My mirror [linux.cz] still has some 30 Mbps of free bandwidth, so if you are in Europe, you can try to download from it.
  • I've been trying for the last hour to connect to my favorite mirror for a couple of RPMs that I need, and it keeps coming back full... but that's never happened in recent memory. My favorite server's almost always completely unloaded (that's why it's my favorite!). Then I think: "This feels like a slashdot. I wonder if the 7.3 release has just been announced?".

    Sure enough.......
    Maybe I'll get my RPMs tomorrow (or tonight at 4am).

  • This is really weird. Browsing the left navbar on the release notes, I just discovered that Red Hat Linux comes with a fancy EULA. Yes, the type that you are assumed to agree to by installing the product. No, I am not making this up. Read for yourself.

    http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhl_standard_us.htm l [redhat.com]

    Now, I have not read the EULA. Perhaps there is nothing sinister here. They probably have a very valid reason for doing this. I suppose the lawyers insist on it. But I had never heard of this practice and I doubt many here have. To me, it seems inconsistent with RedHat's reasonable, pro-open source, transparent attitude.

    I mean, the document says that this applied to 7.2 as well. I installed 7.2 on quite a few machines and never once did the installation program warn me that I was simultaneously "signing" a legal document. Even if that EULA really is harmless, I should be told about it.

    PS: I love Red Hat, bot for their product and their attitude. It is an amazing company, but this comes as a shock to me. And the more I think about it, the weirder I feel about it. Which probably explains why I have been editing this post for 15 minutes now.

    • Re:RedHat and licenses (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Lac ( 135355 )

      Sorry for replying to myself this quickly. But you really have to look at this document. Look at the first part, that talks about the auto-signing "feature" of the EULA.

      By installing any or all of the software included with this product, you agree to the following terms and conditions.

      Now, I really love and respect Red Hat. I haven't lost any respect for them since they started making it big and I am sure that this is just a big, big mistake. Really./P>

      But think about what they are saying! If I use the SRPM to compile and install the source code for kernel, or Emacs, or any GNU tools, I am agreeing to this? Has someone gone insane at RedHat? That software is covered under the GNU GPL. Slapping a EULA on it isn't even remotely legal!

      Putting a EULA on a distribution is one thing. Putting one on "any or all of the software included" with it is another entirely. I hope this is just a big mistake, or that I just misunderstand this whole issue and am blowing it all out of proportion. Anyone at RedHat care to comment?

      • Replying to myself again. This is really a weird document. They have this little bit of sanity in there, which voids part of what I have said.

        Most of the Linux Programs are licensed pursuant to a Linux EULA that permits you to copy, modify, and redistribute the software, in both source code and binary code forms. However, you must review the on-line documentation that accompanies each of the Linux Programs included in this product for the applicable Linux EULA. Review these Linux EULAs carefully, in order to understand your rights under them and to realize the maximum benefits available to you with Red Hat Linux. Nothing in this license agreement limits your rights under, or grants you rights that supercede, the terms of any applicable Linux EULA.

        But then they have this part again.

        CAREFULLY READ THE FOLLOWING TERMS AND CONDITIONS BEFORE INSTALLING ANY OF THE SOFTWARE PROGRAMS. INSTALLING THE SOFTWARE PROGRAMS INDICATES YOUR ACCEPTANCE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THIS DOCUMENT AND OF THE END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, DO NOT INSTALL THE SOFTWARE PROGRAMS.

        So it is not clear to me that this EULA is not adding restrictions on top of all software packages includet with RHL, including the GPL ones. One particular problem is that you have to agree to this license before you can install the software and review individual licenses to see which rights you have.

        Perhaps I'm freaking out needlessly here. I just find it _so_ weird that Red Hat has a EULA. Oh well. I'll get over it. It's not like I'm a license freak or anything.

  • I installed Beta 1. Can I safely run the installer over that? Or perhaps I can just to the uptodate business?

Slashdot Top Deals

Disclaimer: "These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they be yours too." -- Dave Haynie

Close