Red Hat Linux 7.3 Released

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.

Comments

Whats new Link

[bruceg]

HERE is a link to whats new in this release.

Nice spoiler, jerk!

[PD]

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

[Jouster]

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

[tuffy]

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...

Mirrors are found :-)

[French Thias]

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

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

Re:What's new?

[Delirium Tremens]

Alright, it is probably a typo in their release notes. The full package list says Mozilla 0.9.9 . Way better.

x.3 release

[Goronguer]

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!

From looking at the release notes

[wiredog]

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.

Try it in Test Drive

[Test Drive]

I have our Red Hat Test Drive system updated now to Red Hat 7.3. As always, accounts with us are free, and you get access to a number of different systems. Try out the latest releases of operating systems on our hardware before you commit it to your own!

Instant ISOs available

[neuroid]

If you shell out some cash for RHN, they have 'Instant ISOs' available.

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

Re:Does the distribution still include Netscape?

[bero-rh]

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.

Re:Old version of Mozilla?

[bero-rh]

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.

Re:gcc-2.96

[bero-rh]

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).