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 <brendento...@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.reinh...@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 >> >> >> >
