[CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at gmail.com
Thu Jun 4 17:55:14 UTC 2009


Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
> 
>>>>>>>> If you have the epel repo installed and enabled during a yum update, you
>>>>>>>> get java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0-1.0.b12.el5.2 instead of the stock .b09
>>>>>>>> version.  Is this intentional and desirable?  I thought epel generally
>>>>>>>> did not replace stock components with newer versions.
>>>>>>> EPEL doesn't replace rhel5 packages, true, and afaict,  openjdk isn't in
>>>>>>> rhel5.  Perhaps a centos addon/extra?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Rex
>>>>>> That might have been true at one point in time but it isn't now.  On a
>>>>>> stock RHEL5.x you can say 'yum install java-1.6.0-openjdk' and you get a
>>>>> OK, found it, I'll go known some skulls @ epel.
>>>> I'm not sure it's really a bad thing.  For example OpenNMS claims it 
>>>> needs b12 or later.  But it is curious that apparently no one noticed or 
>>>> knows which is better.  Has the history of Linux distro treatment of 
>>>> java (shipping one that doesn't work and being unfriendly to the one 
>>>> that does) completely destroyed any interest?
>>> Many people might not have noticed because they use yum priorities or 
>>> apt pinning, as they should.
>> Which one should get priority, and where is the appropriate place to 
>> learn that?
> 
> by default base+updates should get priority over anything else including 
> epel, don't you agree?

Not necessarily. I don't see any inherent reason that I would want 
openjdk-b09 over b12 and I'd expect the reverse since b12 fixes known 
bugs.  But I would want to know that I'm not the first person to try to 
run it, which is why I raised the question.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com




More information about the CentOS mailing list