[CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel
Paul Johnson
pauljohn32 at gmail.comThu Dec 31 19:36:11 UTC 2009
- Previous message: [CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel
- Next message: [CentOS] yum centos repo dependency hell for matlab loaddap
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 8:14 AM, <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: >>> Still no java browser plugin for Centos? I've been reading the web >>> all night on this, getting angry. I can't find any explanation about >>> why EPEL did have a working browser plugin, but then Centos introduced >>> versions of those same packages that had the plugin removed. Not to >>> mention the fact that Centos keeps the older version (b09) of >>> java-1.6.0, and yet yum seems to think it is a newer version. > I agree with the original poster. Not having the java plugin is fine on > servers, but for users here who *do* use it as a desktop, my choices are > to either not update openjdk or install Sun's Java, which makes openjdk > pointless. > > mark > As luck would have it, I have copies of the java-1.6.0 b12 EPEL RPMS that were offered before Centos added java-1.6.0 b09 as an "upgrade" on my home page. The SRPM is here http://pj.freefaculty.org/Centos/5/i386/epel-source/packages And the RPMS EPEL had offered are here http://pj.freefaculty.org/Centos/5/i386/epel/packages The RedHat/Centos version b09 is heavily patched for some security things and also to disable the plugin (why??). The Epel version is b12, newer, but not so security patched. -- Paul E. Johnson Professor, Political Science 1541 Lilac Lane, Room 504 University of Kansas
- Previous message: [CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel
- Next message: [CentOS] yum centos repo dependency hell for matlab loaddap
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list