9 ms·

Red Hat Unveils Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7

166 points by bbzealot 12y ago

Tomte 12y ago
Great! I can't wait for CentOS. Well, I have to. :-)
- gtirloni 12y ago
  Thanks for the recent cooperation between Red Hat and CentOS, we may not have to wait much! http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/1/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/1/red-ha...
- thebouv 12y ago
  I'm right there with you. Started with RHEL but have since moved to CentOS, even for pet projects or cloud servers I spin up.
nodata 12y ago
404 Edit: works now
- nailer 12y ago
  Looks like they took it down then fixed it again.
  - Miademora 12y ago
    Got the same 404 and after refresh it works. Maybe its overloaded or buggy
- frik 12y ago
  I still get the: 404 Error
nailer 12y ago
So: * Docker * XFS as default filesystem, btrfs available * systemd and .service files replacing the duct tape of overlapping services and shell scripts * Normal RHEL stuff like SystemTap support More info: https://access.redhat.com/site/sites/default/files/pages/attachments/rhel_whatsnewrhel7beta_techoverview_.pdf https://access.redhat.com/site/sites/default/files/pages/att...
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  Not Docker. Linux containers (LXC). They predate Docker by a couple years. Docker is app-focused whereas LXC is more machine focused. Docker uses LXC as an underlying technology making them easier to use for deploying apps. Docker is the current poster-child for containers, but most containers are not Docker and containers have existed for years in multiple forms.
  - nailer 12y ago
    No, explicitly Docker (which includes Linux containers) - see http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/6/red-hat-unveils-rhel-7 http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/6/red-ha.... Actually Docker was added post-release to RHEL 6, but it's there out of the box in RHEL 7.
    - JohnTHaller 12y ago
      I stand corrected. I read three different release notes on it and all of them mentioned LXC without mentioning Docker.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - DanBC 12y ago
      No he hasn't. He's posted duplicate posts - the latest one shows as dead.
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
Alupis 12y ago
This is looking to be an impressive release. Switching to XFS as the default filesystem. Improved MS Active Directory integration Container support (is it Docker? seems too early for RHEL to integrate Docker..? maybe it's just LXC?) systemd is a big win (although a hot topic) CentOS 7 shouldn't be lagging too far behind. The CentOS team recently got taken up with RHEL, so I think we can expect a CentOS update soon (can't wait!).
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  It's LXC. LXC has been around since 2008 (before Docker existed, since Docker builds atop it). And LXC isn't tied to a for-profit company, so RHEL would be more likely to include it.
  - shykes 12y ago
    Actually it's Docker :)
  - Alupis 12y ago
    Was my thoughts exactly. Seems odd to put Docker into a RHEL release, especially since docker only 1.0'ed yesterday. RHEL usually goes for rock solid stable (typically older/matured) packages... LXC seems the natural fit... I could see Docker in RHEL 8 or something...
    - nickstinemates 12y ago
      We have been working with redhat for months. They're amazingly active maintainers of Docker.
    - cwyers 12y ago
      RHEL can go years without seeing a major version increase. In between now and then, a lot of people are going to want to use containers, including Docker. If RHEL doesn't support them, people are going to use Debian/Ubuntu/CoreOS/etc. instead. So Red Hat is supporting them. They know Ubuntu has a head start on them in the cloud, and they do not want to let them widen that gap.
gnoway 12y ago
The XFS-as-default change is surprising. Does anyone know what drove this? I don't keep up with XFS development on Linux, so I don't understand why it's a better choice vs. EXT4 for RHEL7 than it might have been for RHEL6. edit: cleanup wording.
- ramLlama 12y ago
  My understanding is that XFS is now default because it has far better support than ext4 for large (hundreds of TB to PB) volumes. In addition, RedHat employs many core XFS members. With the quashing of the slow metadata performance (http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/), XFS seems to be all-round just as good as ext4 but with more future-proofiness for large volumes. Keep in mind that RHEL releases are supported for around a decade.
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    The new release increases ext4 from 16TB to 50TB and xfs from 100TB to 500TB.
    - awda 12y ago
      Sure, but these are mostly just arbitrary caps. xfs performance at 50TB is supposed to be better than ext4 at 50TB. I don't know what xfs actually does over ext4, but I do know a little bit about ext4; on-disk it looks very similar to the ancient Unix FFS. xfs may use more scalable on-disk structures. Looks like XFS supports concurrency better (both on the request side, and on the kernel<->backing store side).
      - colechristensen 12y ago
        Back in the day, we used xfs instead of ext3 so that when something happened and there was a bad shutdown, our samba servers weren't stuck in fsck for an hour (or a day).
- gtirloni 12y ago
  It looks like the enterprise-y features and agreement with partners mostly drove it, but it's unclear. Red Hat doesn't focus on EXT4 bugs but on selling XFS features. This presentation should be interesting to answer your question: http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rwheeler_thursday_0945_rhel7_beta_file_systems.pdf http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rwheeler_thursda...
listic 12y ago
Which platforms does it run on? Official press release is so high-level, it even skips the 'mundane' details like that. And the documentation isn't ready yet: https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/ https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_E...
- Nux 12y ago
  x86_64 and PPC afaik
  - rwmj 12y ago
    The precise platforms are: x86_64, ppc64 (big endian) & s390x. I think what is more interesting are the platforms that are not in that list. Internally we build for 32 bit i686, ppc (32 bit) and s390, but AFAIK we don't release those. We also don't build for ARM 32 bit (but aarch64 will be in future[1]). Of course this is a lot less than Debian, but we have to carefully choose what we are able to support for customers. This is not a throw-it-at-the-wall approach. [1] http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/red-hat-64-bit-arm-developer-preview-jon-masterss-keynote-at-linaro-asia/#content http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/red-hat-64-bit-arm-deve...
    - CUViper 12y ago
      AFAIK the main reason we still build the 32-bit stuff is to ship multilib packages for their 64-bit siblings.
    - Nux 12y ago
      Thanks for not realeasing the 32bit arch, makes package building and management considerably easier!
      - btgeekboy 12y ago
        Not so fast - I believe CentOS is planning a 32-bit SIG. I'm sure it won't get near the adoption a Red Hat blessed distribution would get (even considering how 32-bit is on its way out), but it exists.
herge 12y ago
I heard that the only way to safely run docker is to have it secured by SELinux, which is available in RHEL and Core OS.
gatehouse 12y ago
Anyone have a rough idea of when/if this will effect the Amazon Linux distro for EC2? Glad they went with MariaDB, I've had some small problems with certain versions of the mysql jdbc being incompatible with MariaDB due to some kind of protocol quirk, but generally I've been planning as if MySQL development will converge on this project.
peterwwillis 12y ago
Funny, but I didn't know CentOS got acquired by Red Hat. They claim they're keeping a separation between the RHEL team and CentOS team, but CentOS development is basically organized, run and funded by Red Hat now.
mwcampbell 12y ago
Does anyone here know which graph driver Docker is using in RHEL7 (aufs or devmapper)?
- Nux 12y ago
  Devmapper (thin lvm/dm-thin) AFAIK, AuFS is not supported by RHEL at all.
fragmede 12y ago
Anyone taken a look at how to get sources for this? RedHat's got some convoluted "we can't store source in git" policy going on.
- cwyers 12y ago
  It's not really convoluted. Their policy is to only publish SRPMS and tarballs. Really straightforward. The reason behind it (to make Oracle's life harder) is also pretty straightforward, even if you disagree with it.
  - fragmede 12y ago
    Sure, but they're not even publishing SRPMS any more.
    - m4r71n 12y ago
      It seems that all source code will be published through CentOS's repositories: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/7Server/en/os/README
sciurus 12y ago
Looks like EPEL for RHEL7 is progressing. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7beta-faq https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7beta-faq

166 points by bbzealot 12y ago

Tomte 12y ago

Great! I can't wait for CentOS. Well, I have to. :-)

gtirloni 12y ago
Thanks for the recent cooperation between Red Hat and CentOS, we may not have to wait much! http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/1/red-hat-and-centos-join-forces http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/1/red-ha...
thebouv 12y ago
I'm right there with you. Started with RHEL but have since moved to CentOS, even for pet projects or cloud servers I spin up.

nodata 12y ago

404 Edit: works now

nailer 12y ago
Looks like they took it down then fixed it again.
- Miademora 12y ago
  Got the same 404 and after refresh it works. Maybe its overloaded or buggy
frik 12y ago
I still get the: 404 Error

nailer 12y ago

So: * Docker * XFS as default filesystem, btrfs available * systemd and .service files replacing the duct tape of overlapping services and shell scripts * Normal RHEL stuff like SystemTap support More info: https://access.redhat.com/site/sites/default/files/pages/attachments/rhel_whatsnewrhel7beta_techoverview_.pdf https://access.redhat.com/site/sites/default/files/pages/att...

JohnTHaller 12y ago
Not Docker. Linux containers (LXC). They predate Docker by a couple years. Docker is app-focused whereas LXC is more machine focused. Docker uses LXC as an underlying technology making them easier to use for deploying apps. Docker is the current poster-child for containers, but most containers are not Docker and containers have existed for years in multiple forms.
- nailer 12y ago
  No, explicitly Docker (which includes Linux containers) - see http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/6/red-hat-unveils-rhel-7 http://www.redhat.com/about/news/press-archive/2014/6/red-ha.... Actually Docker was added post-release to RHEL 6, but it's there out of the box in RHEL 7.
  - JohnTHaller 12y ago
    I stand corrected. I read three different release notes on it and all of them mentioned LXC without mentioning Docker.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - DanBC 12y ago
    No he hasn't. He's posted duplicate posts - the latest one shows as dead.
- JohnTHaller 12y ago

Alupis 12y ago

This is looking to be an impressive release. Switching to XFS as the default filesystem. Improved MS Active Directory integration Container support (is it Docker? seems too early for RHEL to integrate Docker..? maybe it's just LXC?) systemd is a big win (although a hot topic) CentOS 7 shouldn't be lagging too far behind. The CentOS team recently got taken up with RHEL, so I think we can expect a CentOS update soon (can't wait!).

JohnTHaller 12y ago
It's LXC. LXC has been around since 2008 (before Docker existed, since Docker builds atop it). And LXC isn't tied to a for-profit company, so RHEL would be more likely to include it.
- shykes 12y ago
  Actually it's Docker :)
- Alupis 12y ago
  Was my thoughts exactly. Seems odd to put Docker into a RHEL release, especially since docker only 1.0'ed yesterday. RHEL usually goes for rock solid stable (typically older/matured) packages... LXC seems the natural fit... I could see Docker in RHEL 8 or something...
  - nickstinemates 12y ago
    We have been working with redhat for months. They're amazingly active maintainers of Docker.
  - cwyers 12y ago
    RHEL can go years without seeing a major version increase. In between now and then, a lot of people are going to want to use containers, including Docker. If RHEL doesn't support them, people are going to use Debian/Ubuntu/CoreOS/etc. instead. So Red Hat is supporting them. They know Ubuntu has a head start on them in the cloud, and they do not want to let them widen that gap.

gnoway 12y ago

The XFS-as-default change is surprising. Does anyone know what drove this? I don't keep up with XFS development on Linux, so I don't understand why it's a better choice vs. EXT4 for RHEL7 than it might have been for RHEL6. edit: cleanup wording.

ramLlama 12y ago
My understanding is that XFS is now default because it has far better support than ext4 for large (hundreds of TB to PB) volumes. In addition, RedHat employs many core XFS members. With the quashing of the slow metadata performance (http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/ http://lwn.net/Articles/476263/), XFS seems to be all-round just as good as ext4 but with more future-proofiness for large volumes. Keep in mind that RHEL releases are supported for around a decade.
- JohnTHaller 12y ago
  The new release increases ext4 from 16TB to 50TB and xfs from 100TB to 500TB.
  - awda 12y ago
    Sure, but these are mostly just arbitrary caps. xfs performance at 50TB is supposed to be better than ext4 at 50TB. I don't know what xfs actually does over ext4, but I do know a little bit about ext4; on-disk it looks very similar to the ancient Unix FFS. xfs may use more scalable on-disk structures. Looks like XFS supports concurrency better (both on the request side, and on the kernel<->backing store side).
    - colechristensen 12y ago
      Back in the day, we used xfs instead of ext3 so that when something happened and there was a bad shutdown, our samba servers weren't stuck in fsck for an hour (or a day).
gtirloni 12y ago
It looks like the enterprise-y features and agreement with partners mostly drove it, but it's unclear. Red Hat doesn't focus on EXT4 bugs but on selling XFS features. This presentation should be interesting to answer your question: http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rwheeler_thursday_0945_rhel7_beta_file_systems.pdf http://rhsummit.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/rwheeler_thursda...

listic 12y ago

Which platforms does it run on? Official press release is so high-level, it even skips the 'mundane' details like that. And the documentation isn't ready yet: https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/ https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_E...

Nux 12y ago
x86_64 and PPC afaik
- rwmj 12y ago
  The precise platforms are: x86_64, ppc64 (big endian) & s390x. I think what is more interesting are the platforms that are not in that list. Internally we build for 32 bit i686, ppc (32 bit) and s390, but AFAIK we don't release those. We also don't build for ARM 32 bit (but aarch64 will be in future[1]). Of course this is a lot less than Debian, but we have to carefully choose what we are able to support for customers. This is not a throw-it-at-the-wall approach. [1] http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/red-hat-64-bit-arm-developer-preview-jon-masterss-keynote-at-linaro-asia/#content http://rwmj.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/red-hat-64-bit-arm-deve...
  - CUViper 12y ago
    AFAIK the main reason we still build the 32-bit stuff is to ship multilib packages for their 64-bit siblings.
  - Nux 12y ago
    Thanks for not realeasing the 32bit arch, makes package building and management considerably easier!
    - btgeekboy 12y ago
      Not so fast - I believe CentOS is planning a 32-bit SIG. I'm sure it won't get near the adoption a Red Hat blessed distribution would get (even considering how 32-bit is on its way out), but it exists.

herge 12y ago

I heard that the only way to safely run docker is to have it secured by SELinux, which is available in RHEL and Core OS.

gatehouse 12y ago

Anyone have a rough idea of when/if this will effect the Amazon Linux distro for EC2? Glad they went with MariaDB, I've had some small problems with certain versions of the mysql jdbc being incompatible with MariaDB due to some kind of protocol quirk, but generally I've been planning as if MySQL development will converge on this project.

peterwwillis 12y ago

Funny, but I didn't know CentOS got acquired by Red Hat. They claim they're keeping a separation between the RHEL team and CentOS team, but CentOS development is basically organized, run and funded by Red Hat now.

mwcampbell 12y ago

Does anyone here know which graph driver Docker is using in RHEL7 (aufs or devmapper)?

Nux 12y ago
Devmapper (thin lvm/dm-thin) AFAIK, AuFS is not supported by RHEL at all.

fragmede 12y ago

Anyone taken a look at how to get sources for this? RedHat's got some convoluted "we can't store source in git" policy going on.

cwyers 12y ago
It's not really convoluted. Their policy is to only publish SRPMS and tarballs. Really straightforward. The reason behind it (to make Oracle's life harder) is also pretty straightforward, even if you disagree with it.
- fragmede 12y ago
  Sure, but they're not even publishing SRPMS any more.
  - m4r71n 12y ago
    It seems that all source code will be published through CentOS's repositories: ftp://ftp.redhat.com/redhat/linux/enterprise/7Server/en/os/README

sciurus 12y ago

Looks like EPEL for RHEL7 is progressing. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7beta-faq https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/epel7beta-faq