Red Hat Linux - Version History

Version History

Release dates drawn from announcements on comp.os.linux.announce. Version names are chosen as to be cognitively related to the prior release, yet not related in the same way as the release before that.

  • 1.0 (Mother's Day), November 3, 1994 (Linux 1.2.8)
  • 1.1 (Mother's Day+0.1), August 1, 1995 (Linux 1.2.11)
  • 2.0, September 20, 1995 (Linux 1.2.13-2)
  • 2.1, November 23, 1995 (Linux 1.2.13)
  • 3.0.3 (Picasso), May 1, 1996 (Linux 1.2.X) - first release supporting DEC Alpha
  • 4.0 (Colgate), October 3, 1996 (Linux 2.0.18) - first release supporting SPARC
  • 4.1 (Vanderbilt), February 3, 1997 (Linux 2.0.27)
  • 4.2 (Biltmore), May 19, 1997 (Linux 2.0.30-2)
  • 5.0 (Hurricane), December 1, 1997 (Linux 2.0.32-2)
  • 5.1 (Manhattan), May 22, 1998 (Linux 2.0.34-0.6)
  • 5.2 (Apollo), November 2, 1998 (Linux 2.0.36-0.7)
  • 6.0 (Hedwig), April 26, 1999 (Linux 2.2.5-15)
  • 6.1 (Cartman), October 4, 1999 (Linux 2.2.12-20)
  • 6.2 (Zoot), April 3, 2000 (Linux 2.2.14-5.0)
  • 7 (Guinness), September 25, 2000 (this release is labeled "7" not "7.0") (Linux 2.2.16-22)
  • 7.1 (Seawolf), April 16, 2001 (Linux 2.4.2-2)
  • 7.2 (Enigma), October 22, 2001 (Linux 2.4.7-10, Linux 2.4.9-21smp)
  • 7.3 (Valhalla), May 6, 2002 (Linux 2.4.18-3)
  • 8.0 (Psyche), September 30, 2002 (Linux 2.4.18-14)
  • 9 (Shrike), March 31, 2003 (Linux 2.4.20-8) (this release is labeled "9" not "9.0")

The Fedora and Red Hat Projects were merged on September 22, 2003.

  • See List of Fedora versions
Free software portal

Read more about this topic:  Red Hat Linux

Famous quotes containing the words version and/or history:

    “Truth cannot be defined or tested by agreement with ‘the world’; for not only do truths differ for different worlds but the nature of agreement between a world apart from it is notoriously nebulous. Rather—speaking loosely and without trying to answer either Pilate’s question or Tarski’s—a version is to be taken to be true when it offends no unyielding beliefs and none of its own precepts.”
    —Nelson Goodman (b. 1906)

    “Social history might be defined negatively as the history of a people with the politics left out.”
    —G.M. (George Macaulay)