Perfect. Thank you gentlemen.


On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> First: there are no "jre-*-openjdk" packages, It's open source, and
> the licensing is clearner than Sun's old licensing, so you don't have
> to sign a separate agreement to get the jdk. The jdk *includes* the
> jry.
>
> And second, upstream chose to keep 1.6.x releases distinct from 1.7.x
> releaes, with good historical cause. Java "n" versions are never
> completely backwards compatible with Java "n-1" versions and there are
> environments where people require one or the other, that they are
> handled separately. So the full *package* name is
> "java-1.6.0-openjdk", or "java-1.6.0-oracle" for the last Oracle
> published version, and updates are applied to that particular
> "package". Also, the upstream authors of the software, themselves,
> chose to publish parallel, support versions with 1.4 and 1.5 and 1.6
> and 1.7. All of the distinct major versions can be installed in
> parallel, although anything preceeding 1.7.0 should now be replaced as
> quickly as possible as insecure and unsupportable.
>
> The *version", as far as RPM is concerned,  is in the next part of the
> name, "java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0", and the release in the last part of
> the name, "java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0-[mumble]".
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Paul Robert Marino <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > The package names don't match
> >
> >
> >
> > -- Sent from my HP Pre3
> >
> > ________________________________
> > On Jan 25, 2014 22:23, Andrew Z <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >  i just wonder why "yum update" doesn't show java-1.7.0-openjdk-1.7.0 as
> an
> > update to jre-1.6.0-openjdk ?
>