JDK 8: Second Release Candidate

[Martijn Verburg]

Hi Brenden,

Oracle's installer is separate from OpenJDK itself, I'm afraid you'll also
need to report this issue to bugs.sun.com!

Cheers,
Martijn


On 14 February 2014 20:48, Brenden Towey <brendentowey at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, I have another gripe.  I was reminded of this as I was installing
> the new Java 8 bits, and I temporarily removed the older Java 8 version.
>
>
> C:\Users\Brenden\Dev\proj\Test2\build\classes>java -version
> java version "1.7.0_45"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_45-b18)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 24.45-b08, mixed mode)
>
>
> C:\Users\Brenden\Dev\proj\Test2\build\classes>
> C:\Users\Brenden\Dev\proj\Test2\build\classes>java -version
> java version "1.8.0"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0-b129)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.0-b69, mixed mode)
>
> This is before and after.  Notice that the Java 7 version is not updated
> (it should be update 51, I think, not 45).  Your updater fails to update an
> older version if it detects a newer version of Java.  That is, if the
> updater sees Java 8 is installed, it won't ever update Java 7 to the latest
> patch level.  In light of all the recent bad press Java has received
> because of security issues (especially not updating older versions of Java)
> I think this is unacceptable.
>
> Always, always, always update a version of Java if is possible to do so.
>  Sure, don't make an old version of Java the default installation, but
> please update the bits that are sitting on the disc.  There's really no
> good reason not to, and if this sort of scenario ever happens (a user
> uninstalls a current version to expose an older version) you're left with
> known bad bits running on a live installation.  I hope I don't have to
> expound on how lousy an idea that is.
>
> When you do update an older version, you need to check if *any* part of
> that version is still in use.  For example, I don't think the Java 8 RC
> installs a browser plug-in, so I'm still actually using an (unupdated, old,
> u45) Java 7 plug-in.  Getting the most recent plug-in updated to all
> browsers should be a high priority during a Java update.
>
> Thanks again for reading my little missive.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/11/2014 2:31 PM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
>
>> Last week a serious flaw in a new API was reported [1].  We decided to
>> fix that bug, along with an unrelated JCK failure on Mac OS X [2], so
>> we now have a second JDK 8 Release Candidate, build 129.
>>
>> Binaries available here, as usual: https://jdk8.java.net/download.html
>>
>>
>>
>