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