- 196.9K All Categories
- 2.2K Data
- 239 Big Data Appliance
- 1.9K Data Science
- 450.4K Databases
- 221.7K General Database Discussions
- 31 Multilingual Engine
- 550 MySQL Community Space
- 478 NoSQL Database
- 7.9K Oracle Database Express Edition (XE)
- 3K ORDS, SODA & JSON in the Database
- 546 SQLcl
- 4K SQL Developer Data Modeler
- 187K SQL & PL/SQL
- 21.3K SQL Developer
- 295.9K Development
- 17 Developer Projects
- 138 Programming Languages
- 292.6K Development Tools
- 107 DevOps
- 3.1K QA/Testing
- 646K Java
- 28 Java Learning Subscription
- 37K Database Connectivity
- 155 Java Community Process
- 105 Java 25
- 22.1K Java APIs
- 138.1K Java Development Tools
- 165.3K Java EE (Java Enterprise Edition)
- 18 Java Essentials
- 160 Java 8 Questions
- 86K Java Programming
- 80 Java Puzzle Ball
- 65.1K New To Java
- 1.7K Training / Learning / Certification
- 13.8K Java HotSpot Virtual Machine
- 94.3K Java SE
- 13.8K Java Security
- 204 Java User Groups
- 442 LiveLabs
- 38 Workshops
- 10.2K Software
- 6.7K Berkeley DB Family
- 3.5K JHeadstart
- 5.7K Other Languages
- 2.3K Chinese
- 171 Deutsche Oracle Community
- 1.1K Español
- 1.9K Japanese
- 232 Portuguese
Version 1.8 RPM Package Name is Incorrect
I've noticed that RPM package name of JRE and JDK version 1.8u20 is incorrectly named compared to all other RPMs in Linux.
I couldn't figure out why it failed to "update" v1.8u11 to u20, but performing a query on the package reveals the difference in the package name.
This package will not "update" v1.8v11.
rpm -qp jdk-8u20-linux.x64.rpm
Shouldn't the package name be jdk-1.8.0_20-1.8.0_20-fcs.x86_64 ?
Out of thousands of RPM packages, this is the only one without the "dash" behind the package name and the major version.
Someone on the following thread said it was a "management decision". Is this true? Doesn't this break the ease-of-use of RPMs and the RPM standard - whatever that really is?
If you want multiple versions of JDK on a system, then use the TAR files and drop them where ever you want.
Will this change in 1.8u21+?
I also heard that Red Hat may start charging an additional fee for their packaged Java repository when they release their latest version of it. Is this related to changes in Oracle policy?
Not sure if any of this is true or not. Maybe this is a side affect of the change?!
Don't you just love policy changes?