[CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel

Scott Silva ssilva at sgvwater.com
Mon Jun 1 19:09:08 UTC 2009

on 6-1-2009 10:49 AM Les Mikesell spake the following:
> Scott Silva wrote:
>> on 6-1-2009 9:43 AM Les Mikesell spake the following:
>>> If you have the epel repo installed and enabled during a yum update, you 
>>> get java-1.6.0-openjdk- instead of the stock .b09 
>>> version.  Is this intentional and desirable?  I thought epel generally 
>>> did not replace stock components with newer versions.
>> Any third party repo has the potential to replace base files. That is why the
>> priorities and the protectbase plugins were written.
> Obviously they have the potential - and almost equally obviously an end 
> user will have no idea what to choose even if they do have a tiny bit of 
> control over yum (but no way to see where their existing version came 
> from).  But I thought that long ago I asked if epel would supply a newer 
> Firefox or OpenOffice (back when it was needed and RHEL hadn't done it 
> yet...) and someone replied that it would not be epel policy to 
> overwrite stock packages.  Was that not correct - or have things changed?
EPEL was also asked if they could add a repo tag just so people knew where
things came from. That didn't happen either, but much "discussion" did happen.
As for EPEL policy, I guess you will have to ask them. Since it is Fedora
packages being rebuilt, there is going to have to be some newer things being
put in there.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20090601/7ac1843e/attachment.sig>

More information about the CentOS mailing list