Well, folks, do you think it's worth upgrading RH7.2 to RH7.3? So far I've been very much pleased with RH7.2, it seems like a very mature product to me. Let me also tell you that I was very much displeased with RH7.0, to me it felt like a very premature release, did not even have the 2.4 kernel, lots of bugs, e.t.c. I just don't want to go through all the trouble of upgrading and downloading the ISOs and ending up with a thorny version like 7.0.

Any feedback on this will be greatly appreciated. If you don't feel like providing feedback, at least contribute to the poll... Oh, and please, do not suggest other distros. Thanx!

Personally I tried installing it as beta ran into alot of problems eventually gave up went back to 7.2...ok its beta easy to understand...7.3 is released finally, im all for it i install it and notice right away some problems i have with it, for the first time since i started toying with linux learning what i could it froze on me while in screensaver mode..no biggie winxp does that to me when i play a full screen game or screensaver..but thats been fixed with a driver update from ATI...anyways i tried to run cvs for gaim last night after re installing 7.3 again cuz i missed that nifty up2date applet.....and it gave me an error saying i was missing autoconf, and automake....ehhh ok so i install those now i need aclocal.....tried finding it only thing i found was ac-archive i believe is what its called and now its calling for me to copy some files from usr/share....never had this problem with 7.2 so i think i will go back to 7.2 being a quitter for a bit until i have the time to mess with some of that again =D over all i like eyecandy

I think it's worth to upgrade, if you have time.
At least you get new kernel, newer server packages.. and of course kde 3 and other funky stuff

I could hardly beleive anyone saying it is less stable than 7.2, because there isn't anything newer. Think of major changes between 6.2-7.0 => kernel (7.0 not good)
7.0-7.1 => true kernel 2.4 support added stability (7.1 much better than 7.0)
7.1-7.2 => ext3 fs (7.2 best so far)
7.2-7.3 => kde3 not really fundamental for stability, especially in runlevel3 (7.3 no reason to be worse than 7.2)

I think installing redhat in general . . is waste of time...

Just my opinion ..

beliene in

well depends what distro u r used to.
but its most widely used => most development => most exploits => most fixes => most likely to survive ms$ pressure

I had good results with the Skipjack Beta so I installed Red Hat 7.3 and I've been happy with it so far.

what i did was download the 7.3 iso,s , burned it to disks. booted with the cdrom, during the install, i clicked on UPGRADE, i think the whole upgrade took 20 minutes.

do i think it,s worth it, i quess the improvements that were made would justify it. there,s not really any desktop background i liked with 7.3, got some good ones from http://www.kde-look.org.

Well, RedHat is not the only Distro I use. I love Slackware, but I prefer using RedHat as a server, just because managing it is easier. I love the RedHat init scripts.

20 minutes, huh? Impressive...

Are there any other notable differences except KDE3 and the new backgrounds that come with it?

Does is support ReiserFS at installation (like SuSE does)?

i feel RH7.3 same as RH7.2 but KDE3

i feel RH7.3 same as RH7.2 but KDE

I have a question about upgrading. If I use the upgrade option from the ISOs, will it overwrite some of my settings (ie. I've tweaked some stuff...will I need to redo it if I upgrade)?