Hi g! On 2012.03.01 at 18:08:26 +0000, g wrote next:
> > > Unless you have some specific requirements, generally you can use > > SL-supplied java-1.6.0-openjdk and java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel packages > > instead of package above, then you won't have this kind of problem. But > > if you are sure you strictly require Oracle Java implementation, then, > > well, either deal with it, or try checking oracle website to see if you > > are using recommended way of installing it. > -=- > > seems like you are guessing again. Yes, sorry for providing wrong information. Didn't check that that package is hosted in SL repository. Personally, I'm a bit surprised about it: I thought that packages of that kind aren't in main repository. It's just that, well, you know, such packages - which are binary-only additions, they aren't properly built from source will always be second-class citizens. Their existence is also not consistent among EL releases (Centos doesn't have these, RH puts them into additional repo, binary-only, again. Oh and btw SL6 doesn't have these packages, too), which is a problem in mixed environments. They will always lack debuginfo, can lack signatures and cause various problems, coming from them being second-class. Because of that, I simply don't consider them to be proper part of distribution. But that's just my point of view, I understand that you might have different opinion about it. Sadly, looks like oracle still doesn't provide any public yum repository with jdk :-/ -- Vladimir
