Em 30-01-2016 03:26, DJ Lucas escreveu: > > > On 1/29/2016 4:29 PM, BLFS Trac wrote: >> What I read is that 8u71 has security fixes, but not 8u72, which >> they told >> to be ''improvements''. > > Not exactly.
Found it at https://blogs.oracle.com/java/entry/new_release_jdk_8u71_and {{{ New Release JDK 8u71 and JDK 8u72 By Yolande Poirier-Oracle on Jan 19, 2016 JDK 8u71 and 8u72, two new Java 8 updates are now available. Oracle strongly recommends that most Java SE users upgrade to the latest Java 8u71 CPU release, which includes important security fixes. Java SE 8u72 is a patch-set update, including all of 8u71 plus additional features. }}} Sorry if I was not exact, having used "improvements" instead of *additional features*. > The Java release schedule is an odd duck. The way they are > releasing the distributed binaries now is that odd number update (on > release schedule) is a CPU (critical patch update), which is security > patches and regression fixes to the previous PSU (patch set update). > PSUs are the even numbered updates, which is the previous CPU update > revision +1 and includes the security fixes in that CPU. PSUs are > feature changes and enhancements - and aren't usually pushed to java.com > (binary release for regular users) for a while after release (if at all). > > This explains the CPU vs PSU releases: > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/cpu-psu-explained-2331472.html > > > As to the CPU release schedule and planning (and lately PSU, with its > CPU+1 update): > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alerts-086861.html > > This partially explains the oddball release numbering: > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/overview/jdk-version-number-scheme-1918258.html > There was a post on the old -dev list that explained it in more detail, > but I'm unable to find it right now. > > In addition to all of that, they have even by 20 (20, 40, 60, 80) for > "Limited" (off cycle updates). And finally, all other numbers in the > space are reserved for special updates, usually for particularly nasty > bugs or security flaws. 7u7, 7u17 and 7u67 were the last three (though > 67 is listed as Limited on the history, think this is a typo), haven't > been any for 8 yet. See a pattern there? :-) > > https://www.java.com/en/download/faq/release_dates.xml > > As to which version to use...I keep my Windows clients who use JRE/JDK > on the CPU releases (and disable automatic updates and deploy via GPO or > like) unless a new feature or bug fix is needed (which has yet to happen). > > All that said, given the audience, I think PSU/Limited/Special is the > correct release for BLFS. These designations do not mean unstable, just > newer and not largely tested in the wild (but still tested pretty > thoroughly, at least among the java devs). Thank you very much for this text. I will keep it in my folder of important information. -- []s, Fernando, aka SÃsifo -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
