Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat 9 To Be Released March 31
Garfunkel writes "Looks like Red Hat is breaking tradition and skipping 8.1 and 8.2 and jumping directly to 9.0 RHN subscribers
get it a week ahead on March 31st. Available to the rest the world a week
later (April 7)." The website refers to the upcoming release simply as "9" -- which doesn't rule out future point releases, but could it be?
Anyone know if this is using 2.4.20 or still 2.4.18 (like in 8.0)? I didn't see a link to what versions are included or what the major differences are.
Thanks,
Adam
All these new releases are making me dizzy. I still think 7.3 is new.
Anyone know if they'll release DVD ISOs? I think for previous versions you had to be a member or whatever.
It would be kinda nice to download just about every package and put it on one DVD.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
I really hope that Red Hat drops the Unified desktop for RH 9.
what is the point of using another window manager, if the interface is **EXACTLY** the same. This doesn't even consider the quality of their interface, which is ok.
They also offer 0 customization on their interface, which is really annoying.
For now at least, I will stick SSHing into my PS2, and then using everything in text mode.
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
It's all very well RedHat playing "keeping up with the Jones'" with Slackware and Mandrake, but what about those of us who have spent our hard-earned money on a not-so-cheap certification that will now be rendered expired because of this jump to 9.0?
I got my RHCE less than a year ago, at RH7.2. It was stated that RHCE's are valid for two releases - ie when 9.0 came about, I have to recertify.
Was I wrong to expect that since it took two years to go from 7.0 to 8.0, I might actually have been able to hold onto my certification for more than one year!?
Since it's free software, couldn't an RHN member technically just leak it without consequence?
evil adrian
Also in the 8.x series redhat does not ship apache 1.3x or perl 5.6. Only the latest 2.0 with perl 5.8 which no mod-perl modules is available.
After an install alot of downloading is diffinetly required.
http://saveie6.com/
Umm I have seen that break more servers than a Linux upgrade ever did..
YellowDog offer early ISO's to people who pay as well, I guess it's a result of the fact that people mostly download GNU/Linux distros these days?
Check out MKDoc a mod_perl CMS
Now we have to bump all the variants up one major number...
I really think we could have seen kernel 2.6 before a 9.0 came out, or, at least readiness for it.
Anyone know if RH 9.0 will have the required tools already there for 2.[56].xx?
Compared to war, all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, how I love it. - Gen. George Patton
And release it as 9.1 without a 9.0. IBM does that with DB2, because apparently point-oh releases scare people away. It seems to me that version numbers for most things don't mean anything anymore. If you're going to just make up a number that sounds good to customers, then just name the release instead.
Ok, they change the major version when the API changes. Fair enough. But 8 wasn't ready for prime time and I'll bet 9 won't be either if it has enough low level changes to require a new major. Will a new stable version ship before 7.3 goes unsupported on Dec 31? Perhaps, but it sure won't leave much time to test and deploy.
If they are going to pitch themselves as "Commercial Linux" they really need to act like it. And no, their "Enterprise" offerings are only going to be applicable to a very small customer base, the ones who would be buying Solaris or HP-UX; i.e. Enterprise computing applications. not the computing lab or departmental server market. If they are departing the small/medium/education markets I really wish they would announce that so we could be putting energy into investigating alternatives NOW instead of when the crunch hits Dec 31.
Democrat delenda est
Just go to -1. Any geek will know it's the ultimate version number, then you can only wrap around.
*Just* after I get my video drivers (NVIDIA), mouse (Logitech) and soundcard drivers (SB Live)all up and running.
I'm running RH8.0 ATM, and am a big newb to linux. I am wondering what one needs to do after an 'upgrade' install when they have previous drivers/settings already installed/setup:
Does the 'upgrade' ape all my settings?
I have read here that I will need to wait for new NVidia drivers to come out, then go through the hassle of figuring out how to install these. I'm guessing I need to uninstall my 'old' drivers (as per nvidia's readme) *before* I would install the new ones?
My Logitech mouse just needed a bit of tweaking to get working in X, in XF86Config. Will this setting be gone?
I *just* finished figuring out how to compile/install/blah some drivers (http://opensource.creative.com) for my SB Live! 5.1 Platinum. Will these needed to be uninstalled before I 'upgrade'? Or perhaps removed and reinstalled *after* the 'upgrade'?
Hope someone can answer these, and lend a calming hand. Thanks!
Great timing, i *just* switched over my kde to kde3.1 via apt-get. I'm not really sure how I feel about redhat's odd way of grabbing their revenue stream. I do like the fact that they have a slew of people paid working on the code but the up2date thing makes me really unhappy. I'm very close to making a redhat wrapper (in the same way that mandrake was a redhat wrapper at some point) that is basically redhat/rpm compatibility based but w/out some of the annoying revenue stream add-ons. The obvious one is that is officially moving redhat over to apt Right now there are only a few redhat apt-mirrors, but I would be more than willing to host a mirror and it will easily allow us and anyone else to keep the security updates at least "up2date" w/out paying per year per node. The other thing to look at is synaptic which is also a really nice gui for apt as well and puts what i've always liked about debian on the redhat platform.
:)
,synaptic and having a slew of decent apt-mirror sites would be an obvious and simple fix
Also redhat doesn't seem to be doing very well w/ kde. I am not sure whether it is because kde3.0 was really buggy or something happened w/ the 7.3->8.0 transition but I wouldn't mind a redhat that was "un-unified." At the very least, a kde/konqueror that was usable then, since many people think the unified thing is a good thing
Anyway maybe talking to a few people and seeing if it would be possible to collect a cd of non-gpl but "open" developer software (Kylix 3, intel compilers 6.0 (kind of a weird license)) would also be nice addons.
At the very least I think defaulting/forking redhat to include apt
the security updating issue w/ the current incarnation of redhat. Its also I think obvious that redhat will never release the up2date server source and have obvious reasons for not incorporating apt into the offical distribution so it may require the redhat' wrapper trick to get apt in there.
In any case, i'm curious as to what you guys think, one the one hand i think its a bit "assholish" as it deprives them of one of their obvious revenue streams, on the other hand I think for those of us who run clusters or whatnot or even want to auto-redistribute custom software onto our own nodes having access to the equivalent of our own up2date software (which apt is a better version of to be honest) is a reasonable task, and furthermore wrapping around redhat (like mandrake did) is somewhat what open source is all about as well, especially as redhat and redhat-compatible rpms/source(i.e. ati/nvidia/vmware drivers) is a bit ubiquitous.
-bloosqr
It just really seems like redhat is trying to become the next M$. Obviously in a few months they're going to end free updates, and now this crap. So basically now we're going to have reinstall redhat every couple of months to stay up to date, becuase they're no longer going to to update their products that are a year old, and it seems that with every release they are going to break binary compatitbility. Please, someone point me in a sane direction for a good easy to update linux distro. I really can't decided what I want to run. I was thinking redhat 8.1, but I'm not sure if I want to deal with them much longer. I may give debian another shot, and hmmmmm FreeBSD 4.8 supposed to come out today....very tempting. I want to hear from people, what are you running, what do you like. Please help me out! P.S. I'm not afraid of the command line and a ports system would be very nice.
I would like to observe that Sun uses non-dotted releases since Solaris 7. This is done to smoothen the upgrade pipeline. In particular, Red Hat suffer from "x.0 is crap" perception, which they seek to change.
The binary compatibility in the "integer release number" situation is handled with a "compatibility bracket", which acts in a simple way. When a feature is going to be changed or removed, a notice is posted with a release, and the change itself is done in the next release. Thus, the two release bracket. I cannot guarantee that this is what actually will happen in case of Red Hat, but it may.
The more flexible way to handle compatibility recognizes that compatibility is a complicated phenomena, and not something that we can "guarantee". I, for once, have RPMs which were built on 5.1, an they continue to work just fine. On the other end of the spectrum, an application may concievably depend on an aspect of implementation which becomes a subject of an immediate adjustment with a security errata. The recent ptrace update can break applications, for instance. This has something to do with the nature of software we run, and is not specific to RHL, RHEL, or even Linux.
Speaking of RHEL, it does address a split between customers with requirements for fast development and those who are more conservative. In particular, ISVs uniformly rally in support of it. I am talking about Veritas, IBM (with WebSphere and Java in general), SAP, and companies with more esoteric or niche specific products.
In the past, MDK was the refuge for people who wanted everything latest while staying with generally RH type of Linux. With unfortunate events that transpired recently, it may be better if RH picked the pace a little on the RHL side, as opposed to RHEL.
Just to let you know what kind of conservatism in RHEL we are talking here, the latest QU for RHEL 2 was shipping with kernel 2.4.9-e.14. Maintaining a codebase so ancient is not a piece of cake, please trust me on that. If RHL side of the house tried to work on similar level of binary compatibility, they would not be able to accomplish a third of what they do.
-- Xxxxx
What it means is, starting with RH9, you have 12 months of errata. You'll be able to use RH9 until March 31st, 2004, a year after release.
This *is* inconvenient, because it means, at minimum, taking a machine down to kickstart it every year. THAT is annoying as hell, especially since you aren't going to deploy RH9 site-wide for at least 2-3 months (shortening the releases "lifetime" by 3 months).
I thought this was a huge problem until I looked at their ES level enterprise solution. Since enterprise entitlements are $120 anway, paying $230 for an OS that doesn't expire for 3-5 years seems perfectly reasonable.
If your systems are mission-critical enough to NEED to be left stable for *years*, then going with Advanced Server makes more sense than any other distro - they stabalize the platform for 18 months between releases, minimizing your QA and upgrade time significantly.
The next edition of RedHat I believe is supposed to include the new kernel threads stuff, with the glibc that supports it (hence re-implementing pthreads), it has a new compiler, and the new glibc. So probably the applications aren't binary compat with 8.0, so this is now 9.0. The price you pay for upgrading. It's not like the upgrade path doesn't work, and it's not like upgrading past these things will be vastly superior on Gentoo.
They are pushing out new big things, if you want to stay current, then upgrade to it. What's the big deal about the major version number? I really don't see why your panties are in a bunch with RedHat. Gentoo will do most of the same crapola to your machine that Redhat does when you upgrade, it just won't have a major version number change. Big whoop.
Kirby
I'd note that this one (related to symbol versions) is a problem whenever glibc is upgraded. One solution is to compile against the LSB, which will force your binary to use versions other than the latest ones. You lose new functionality, but it means your binaries have some chance of running on older distros.
It also seems to include gcc 3.2.1 which is ABI incompatible between gcc 3.[01] and most definitely between the unofficial 2.96 used in RH8. Shouldn't affect any C programs but it would affect all C++ programs
Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
I wonder if RH will have something to say about Office Depot's new policy. The linked site gives a list of retailers that will carry RH9 on April 7th. However according to this article, OD will be doing away with anything computer related not stamped "Windows XP Certified". ---- snip ---- Get your copy of Red Hat Linux 9. Beginning April 7, 2003 at the: redhat.com store Or these retail locations: * Best Buy * CompUSA * Fry's Electronics * Microcenter * Staples * Office Depot ---/snip---
Enterprise Service Entitlement 10 $96/yr
Basic Service Entitlement 0 $60/yr
Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS Developer Edition n/a $60/yr
Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS Basic Edition n/a $179/yr
Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES Basic Edition n/a $349/yr
Note that if you have a bunch of servers at 7.2/7.3, not only do you have to have them offline for many hours each for the update/install process, you have to go from paying $60/96 a year, to paying $349 a year (yes, I called them to verify the $349 was the only option for ES to be on the RHN).
MY GOD. I asked what the option was to get just updates - there is none. You have to get support. I don't want support. Note that the $349 only covers installation and hardware support anyway, so...in subsequent years, its useless (cause what the hell hardware support are they going to give, esp beyond installation?).
Having RHN costs jump from 3.5-6 times as much as current, with no added value...that's a problem. Does M$ charge $349 a year to download updates? Nope. Note that its still the same set of tools, same everything. Redhat isn't reinventing the wheel here, they're just putting it in a different box.
Again, I'll just probably set up my own update server, or move to another service. Its just odd to be forced to do that.
did anyone else notice the sender and reply-to addresses? they're both dev-null@rhn.redhat.com whereas normal redhat emails are from rhn-admin.
early april's fool?
Yes, the next major release of Red Hat Linux will be Red Hat 9, but:
Something that nobody so far has picked up on, is that this is just the start of an entirely new versioning scheme. Red Hat's operating systems manager, Matt Wilson, has suggested that the release following 9 may not be 9.1 or 10, but rather something entirely different. This makes sense in the light of Red Hat's recent announcement of its Enterprise range. I guess Red Hat Linux may no longer exist in its current form, but rather branch into Red Hat Linux Enterprise and Red Hat Linux Personal, with a new version numbering scheme to boot, maybe starting again at 1, or maybe even based on the year it was released in.
Red Hat's opinion on all of this (and since the company I work for is in a business relationship with them, I am quite certain of this) is that if you want a stable, long-supported system (ie, a server), use their Enterprise Server or Advanced Server editions.
/. and download the latest+greatest when it becomes available and proceed to hack the distro in some way are never going to pay Red Hat the money needed to innovate server or corporate desktop features. However, they form a terrific symbiotic partner, getting a free distro and Red Hat getting extreme stress testing.
The base distro (ie, RH 8.0) is meant for desktop and/or hobby and/or low cost use. They will continue to use it as a testbed, updating and changing things (ie, possibly breaking them) for quite awhile until they have a -good- corporate desktop environment. Because of this, it is a nightmare to support the base distro very long.
[my opinion:]
I would conjecture that in 18-36 months you will see Red Hat create a Red Hat Corporate Desktop Edition or something similar, which also has extended support possibilites and, like Enterprise and Advanced Server, is not a free download. I don't expect the base distro to ever go away, but people need to realize that is their testbed, not their bread and butter.
Folks who read
And if someone doesn't like the things Red Hat does with the desktop and/or does not like the short-term focus Red Hat gives the base distribution, there are MANY other choices to go with.
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
Open Source companies NEED people willing and able to pay a premium to receive premium service.
Maybe so, but it's not the job of consumers to prop up a business, either. RedHat knew what they were getting into when they started distributing GPL code. If there are people willing to spend the money on additional services, that's fine, Redhat will make money. But by the same token, there are people out there who are entirely UNWILLING to pay for such things. This is the gamble that REDHAT takes when they mess with GPLd software.
The analogy with the motorbike is just insane, and completely irrelevant to this situation.