[CentOS] stock openjdk vs. epel

Nicolas Thierry-Mieg Nicolas.Thierry-Mieg at imag.fr
Thu Jun 4 17:45:55 UTC 2009

Les Mikesell wrote:
> Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:
>> Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> Rex Dieter wrote:
>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>> 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?

More information about the CentOS mailing list