F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in Fedora

Mikolaj Izdebski mizdebsk at redhat.com
Wed Feb 25 09:14:35 UTC 2015

On 02/24/2015 04:06 PM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
> On 02/24/2015 04:03 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
>> On 02/24/2015 03:51 PM, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
>>>> 2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
>>>>      get security updates).
>>> Firstly, as I understand upgrade isn't supposed to remove packages by
>>> default, unless they are obsoleted or conflict with something. Are you
>>> saying that JDKs should be treated exceptionally by package management
>>> systems?
>> I should add that user can easily remove packages which were installed
>> as dependencies, but which are no longer needed by running "yum
>> autoremove" command.
> So by other words - from option "one" and "two" you vote for two, no
> renaming, and removing rules 4,5,6,7.

Technically I'm against this change, see my first post.

> You do not complain about rule 2 and 3.Right?

Rule 2 is definitely a good thing. Muliple providers of the same thing
don't work in practice, so we should have only one package providing
"java" etc.

I don't know the exact scheme used for priorites, so I can't comment on
rule 3. I trust you to set priorities correctly so that "main JDK" has
highest priority. Lecacy and tech-preview JDKs should IMO have lower

Mikolaj Izdebski
Software Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: mizdebsk

More information about the devel mailing list