On 4 Apr 2008 at 11:16, Harold Fuchs wrote: ... > > Looks as though when the jre updates, it doesn't remove old versions. > > > > In this case, OOo seems to be using 1.5.0_04, although the latest is > > 1.6.0_05. Should it be safe (always??) to use the latest with OOo? > > > As far as I know, yes. My OOo 2.3.1 happily uses my Java 1.6.0_05 > > And anyway, what's with keeping all the old versions? Wierd idea!! > > > It's no business of OOo to wipe away older version(s) of Java. Also, it's
No, absolutely not; I wasn't suggesting that. > not really the business of a new Java to wipe away older versions of itself > because it doesn't have any way to tell what software might be relying on Well, maybe, or not. Things that update automatically should at least tell the user that old versions are stacking up and offer the option. > those older versions and which might break with the new version. For > example, I seem to remember having problems with QuickTime when I removed an > older Java after installing a new one. I'm not sure its updating scheme is any recommendation at all for java. But that's definitely not an OOo issue. I'll have a spring clean and see what happens! -- Permission for this mail to be processed by any third party in connection with marketing or advertising purposes is hereby explicitly denied. http://www.scottsonline.org.uk lists incoming sites blocked because of spam [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mike Scott, Harlow, Essex, England --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
