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 ? >