Discussions
Categories
- 197.1K All Categories
- 2.5K Data
- 546 Big Data Appliance
- 1.9K Data Science
- 450.7K Databases
- 221.9K General Database Discussions
- 3.8K Java and JavaScript in the Database
- 31 Multilingual Engine
- 552 MySQL Community Space
- 479 NoSQL Database
- 7.9K Oracle Database Express Edition (XE)
- 3.1K ORDS, SODA & JSON in the Database
- 555 SQLcl
- 4K SQL Developer Data Modeler
- 187.2K SQL & PL/SQL
- 21.3K SQL Developer
- 296.3K Development
- 17 Developer Projects
- 139 Programming Languages
- 293K Development Tools
- 110 DevOps
- 3.1K QA/Testing
- 646.1K Java
- 28 Java Learning Subscription
- 37K Database Connectivity
- 158 Java Community Process
- 105 Java 25
- 22.1K Java APIs
- 138.2K Java Development Tools
- 165.3K Java EE (Java Enterprise Edition)
- 19 Java Essentials
- 162 Java 8 Questions
- 86K Java Programming
- 81 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
- 24 JavaScript - Nashorn
- Programs
- 466 LiveLabs
- 39 Workshops
- 10.2K Software
- 6.7K Berkeley DB Family
- 3.5K JHeadstart
- 5.7K Other Languages
- 2.3K Chinese
- 175 Deutsche Oracle Community
- 1.1K Español
- 1.9K Japanese
- 233 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
* Results:
jdk1.8.0_20-1.8.0_20-fcs.x86_64
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?
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055864
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?
Answers
-
I also noticed it and I think this was a stupid decision. I was working on rpm files for software that reliies on JDK, so I could say things like
Required: jdk >= 2000:1.7.0_55-fcs, jdk < 2000:1.8.0_00-fcs
That does not work anymore for jdk8u20 and later, I would need to tell the exact jdk version for each of my releases...
And also now many have the problem that they can't update JDK via rpm automatically anymore!
So does anyone have an idea how to solve this new problem? How to install/update JDK automatically on Linux Systems?
-
Hmmm... Oracle breaking customers? Sounds like Oracle. Do you guys know what you just did? Do you even care?
Multiple versions of Java (believe it or not Java has been fairly successful) has been dealt with for YEARS.... do not change the rpm package just because you (Oracle) can't figure out how to handle it.
More motivation to switch? Please fix this. This is something that is just plain BROKEN. If you need technical assistance on how to properly manage multiple versions, or simply need some education on how rpm works, let me know.
-
Hmmm - did you happen to notice this thread is over a YEAR old?
If OP, you or others want to report a bug or submit an enhancement request use your MOS account to open an SR and provide the info to Oracle.
This forum is for volunteers and they can do NOTHING for you except help answer your questions,.