I have an linux server running on Redhat enterprise (RHEL) but the tool versions in package managers are often obsolete. How can someone claim stability for RHEL while all the tools are so outdated? Is it really worth it?

There is really a misconception on the versioning of the packages Red Hat offers through the channels. Important point is, " Red Hat maintains a different package versioning and its NOT exactly same as upstream packages!!! " Yes, this is true. Let me put all the points I know for justifying that why the package versions are different than that of upstream versions. 1. Red Hat doesn't simply take the sources from upstream but work on that source and make it stable for the Enterprise Level Systems. 2. For an Enterprise Level machine, new feature might be an over-head but stable old feature is really a positive point to go with. 3. As Red Hat maintains different package versioning scheme, almost all the time, the Vulnerability tests which are done on the basis of upstream versions and there ChangeLogs gives false results. (The Vulnerability Tests which just compare the package versions with the upstream packages), so the Red Hat Packages seem to be "toooooooo" old!!! Red Hat Engineering works on a concept called as backporting a patch from upstream, which means, without changing the major release/version of a package, get the upstream patch into the package xyz. It has some business reasons as well. Consider your organization has done some kind of certification on RHEL for a particular package level, and if Red Hat releases some sort of update and changes the version of packages in the same speed, your certification won't last for long time. Just to add, Red Hat releases security updates as early as possible which is really admired by clients. Red Hat ships the packages for long term basis, i.e. the package and its version is taken from upstream and it's delivered for long term basis, however, Red Hat still have to include the bug fixes and latest updates to the packages, this is the reason Red Hat backports the new changes to packages rather than changing the version numbers to highest versions. Meanwhile, Engineering has to maintain the backward compatibility as well. In simple words "Add something new without breaking anything else which is working". One should not compare the versions of upstream packages and the packages provided by Red Hat to confirm if the packages Red Hat provides are outdated or not. :-) To understand the complete backporting process, give a look at https://access.redhat.com/security/updates/backporting/ link. And latest is not always ensures stabilities. Red Hat Engineering has to do alot of regression testings by QA team. To ensure the stability, make sure to get proper signed package updates from Red Hat channels and in case of Security Vulnerability Updates or statements, refer https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/

It is an extremely common misconception that newer somehow translates into more stable.  It really means that one is likely trading old bugs for new ones.  In the case of an "enterprise" operating system, having known bugs is always going to trump being taken by surprise. The problem that you are facing is really one of trying to use software that has requirements that the base packages that ship with your OS doesn't support. This has nothing to do with stability.