Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released

Posted by CmdrTaco on 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.

4 of 463 comments (clear)

  1. A Question by Jouster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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

  2. x.3 release by Goronguer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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!

  3. Re:Old version of Mozilla? by bero-rh · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's not.
    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):

    • It doesn't build without Sun JDK. We're looking into porting to gcj, but it's quite a way to go. Since gcj in any gcc prior to 3.1 is rather sucky, this was not even possible for a 7.x release.
    • The UNO stuff requires a specific version of gcc, and it's not the "right" one.
    • The installation process is not suitable for packaging. (Try building an RPM of something requiring GUI input during installation...)


    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.
    --
    This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html
  4. Re:gcc-2.96 by bero-rh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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).
    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).

    --
    This message is provided under the terms outlined at http://www.bero.org/terms.html