>
>
> > Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 at 7:38 PM
> > From: "Rick Stevens"
> > To: "Community support for Fedora users"
> > Subject: Re: jre
> >
> > On 05/20/2016 10:21 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> > >
> > >
Community support for Fedora users"
> Subject: Re: jre
>
> On 05/20/2016 10:21 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> >
> > OK,
> >
> > but it seems that it also needs
> > javaw
> > which is not provided.
> > Is it javawriter ?
>
> I suspect you hav
a console window while javaw does not.
You might try doing a symlink and see if it works:
$ sudo ln -s /usr/bin/java /usr/bin/javaw
No guarantees on if that'll, though.
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 at 6:41 PM
From: "Rick Stevens"
To: "Community support for Fedora u
riday, May 20, 2016 at 6:41 PM
> From: "Rick Stevens"
> To: "Community support for Fedora users"
> Subject: Re: jre
>
> On 05/20/2016 09:31 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
> > Thank you.
> >
> > But:
> > Package java-1.8.0-openjdk-1:1.8.0.91-2.b1
On 05/20/2016 09:31 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
Thank you.
But:
Package java-1.8.0-openjdk-1:1.8.0.91-2.b14.fc22.x86_64 is already installed,
skipping.
which jre returns:
/usr/bin/which: no jre in
(/root/bin:/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/bin:/usr/lib64/ccache:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr
Thank you.
But:
Package java-1.8.0-openjdk-1:1.8.0.91-2.b14.fc22.x86_64 is already installed,
skipping.
which jre returns:
/usr/bin/which: no jre in
(/root/bin:/usr/lib64/qt-3.3/bin:/usr/lib64/ccache:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin)
So
On 05/20/2016 08:27 AM, Patrick Dupre wrote:
I wish to install on application (jpicedt) which requires jre.
Which jre install ?
The package is java-1.8.0-openjdk, but "dnf install jre" will work.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscripti
Hello,
I wish to install on application (jpicedt) which requires jre.
Which jre install ?
Thank for your help.
Regards.
===
Patrick DUPRÉ | | email: pdu...@gmx.com
Laboratoire de Physico
On 7/21/2013 5:40 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:35 AM, David wrote:
>> most people don't need Java so it's space was
>> replaced with something useful to many.
>
> Please dont confuse "needing Java" with that myopic/biased view of
> "Java as applets".
>
> There's plenty
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:35 AM, David wrote:
> most people don't need Java so it's space was
> replaced with something useful to many.
Please dont confuse "needing Java" with that myopic/biased view of
"Java as applets".
There's plenty of useful cross platform Java apps out there. I can
think o
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 21:29:55 -0300
Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM, David wrote:
> > So what you are complaining about is that the people that made the
> > Xfce ISO did not build it exactly to your, personal specifications?
> > Really? How dare them to not build one just
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:46:12 -0400
Fernando Cassia wrote:
> No, apparently there is no Java at all on the liveCD... :-(
I assume you mean the Xfce live media here... there's lots of Fedora
LiveCd's. ;)
> $ java
> bash: java: command not found
> [liveuser@localhost ~]$
>
> I got used to bootin
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 9:06 PM, nomnex wrote:
>
> Well, thanks Fernando. I too was used to see OpenJDK include in the
> live CD by force of habit.
Good to know I wasn't the only one.
FC
--
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
- George Orwell
--
users
On 7/19/2013 8:29 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM, David wrote:
>> So what you are complaining about is that the people that made the Xfce
>> ISO did not build it exactly to your, personal specifications? Really?
>> How dare them to not build one just for you!!
>
> No
On 07/20/2013 02:29 AM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM, David wrote:
So what you are complaining about is that the people that made the Xfce
ISO did not build it exactly to your, personal specifications? Really?
How dare them to not build one just for you!!
No, re-read
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 6:36 PM, David wrote:
> So what you are complaining about is that the people that made the Xfce
> ISO did not build it exactly to your, personal specifications? Really?
> How dare them to not build one just for you!!
No, re-read my message. Im saying that OpenJDK was part
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 15:27:15 -0400,
Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Desktop team manages the live cd. Several packages were dropped in the last
minute due to space limitations
The ISO isn't even 700MB! Why are they still using 650MB appare
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:47:12 -0400
> Fernando Cassia wrote:
>
> Apparently the RPMs are 29MB compressed, including all deps...
>
> # yum install java-1.7.0-openjdk
> Loaded plugins: fastestmirror, langpacks
> Loading mirror speeds from cached hostfile
Well, thanks Fernando. I too was used to s
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> For example the OpenJDK 8 version might have been picked up. (I didn't check
> to see if that was what happened, but rather it is a plausible cause that
> might have changed things without any of the XFCE guys noticing.)
No, apparently the
On 7/19/2013 3:13 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> Who was the genius who decided Fedora 19 XFCE should no longer include
> the OpenJDK 7 JRE like F18 did?.
>
> This causes me lots of hassle.
> :-(
>
> FC
>
So what you are complaining about is that the people that made th
xorg-x11-fonts-Type1noarch7.5-8.fc19 fedora 521 k
Transaction Summary
==
Install 1 Package (+8 Dependent packages)
Total download size: 29 M
(no need to reply, I' m just gathering data about OpenJDK 7 JRE size,
and posted
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 15:13:14 -0400,
Fernando Cassia wrote:
Who was the genius who decided Fedora 19 XFCE should no longer include
the OpenJDK 7 JRE like F18 did?.
You are not being excellent.
This causes me lots of hassle.
You can build your own custom live images relatively easily
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:27:15 -0400
Fernando Cassia wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram
> wrote:
> > Desktop team manages the live cd. Several packages were dropped
> > in the last minute due to space limitations
>
> The ISO isn't even 700MB! Why are they still using 650MB
Hi
Oh, I see you did and I missed that. In any case, Xfce target is CD Size
Rahul
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guid
Hi
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
>
> The ISO isn't even 700MB! Why are they still using 650MB apparently as
> the CD size?
>
You never mentioned that you were using the Xfce image and yes, Xfce still
targets CD size
Rahul
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproj
Hi
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Fernando Cassia wrote:
> Who was the genius who decided Fedora 19 XFCE should no longer include
> the OpenJDK 7 JRE like F18 did?.
>
> This causes me lots of hassle.
>
Desktop team manages the live cd. Several packages were dropped in the
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Desktop team manages the live cd. Several packages were dropped in the last
> minute due to space limitations
The ISO isn't even 700MB! Why are they still using 650MB apparently as
the CD size?
F19 XFCE ISO image:
HTTP request sent, await
Who was the genius who decided Fedora 19 XFCE should no longer include
the OpenJDK 7 JRE like F18 did?.
This causes me lots of hassle.
:-(
FC
--
During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act
Durante épocas de Engaño Universal, decir la verdad se convierte en un
On 05/15/2013 08:53 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
So, let's all do it right and use openBSD?
Installing only what you need has really not much in common with
switching to a entirely different operating system.
But I find the conflicting directions in Fedora a bit perplexing, of late.
Needs more
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 7:44 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 13.05.2013 20:34, schrieb Bill Davidsen:
> > Fernando Cassia wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Reindl Harald
> wrote:
> >>> do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
> >>
> >> I could be wrong, but I believe the curren
I prefer OpenJDK
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 13.05.2013 20:34, schrieb Bill Davidsen:
> > Fernando Cassia wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Reindl Harald
> wrote:
> >>> do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
> >>
> >> I could be wrong, but
Am 13.05.2013 20:34, schrieb Bill Davidsen:
> Fernando Cassia wrote:
>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
>>
>> I could be wrong, but I believe the current OpenJDK and Icedtea-web
>> approach is NOT to run unsigned applets by
Fernando Cassia wrote:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
I could be wrong, but I believe the current OpenJDK and Icedtea-web
approach is NOT to run unsigned applets by default, and modern
browsers (ie Mozilla's Firefox) now fe
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
I could be wrong, but I believe the current OpenJDK and Icedtea-web
approach is NOT to run unsigned applets by default, and modern
browsers (ie Mozilla's Firefox) now feature CLICK TO RUN on all
Am 04.05.2013 00:01, schrieb Jim:
> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
> What Packages would I download ?
java-1.7.0-openjdk
icedtea-web
icedtea-web is the browser-plugin
do NOT install it if you are not really use it!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital sig
On 04.05.2013 09:59, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 04.05.2013 03:19, schrieb poma:
>> On 04.05.2013 00:41, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 04.05.2013 00:26, schrieb poma:> On 04.05.2013 00:01, Jim wrote:
>>>>> Fedora 18 ,is ther
On 04.05.2013 04:25, Kevin J. Cummings wrote:
> On 05/03/2013 06:26 PM, poma wrote:
>> On 04.05.2013 00:01, Jim wrote:
>>> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
>>>
>>> What Packages would I download ?
>>
>> alternatives --config java
On 05/03/2013 06:26 PM, poma wrote:
> On 04.05.2013 00:01, Jim wrote:
>> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
>>
>> What Packages would I download ?
>
> alternatives --config java ;)
This lets hin pick from packages already installed on his system.
On 04.05.2013 00:41, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 04.05.2013 00:26, schrieb poma:> On 04.05.2013 00:01, Jim wrote:
>>> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
>>>
>>> What Packages would I download ?
>>
>> alternatives --config
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Jim wrote:
> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
>
> What Packages would I download ?
>
LONG ANSWER:
OpenJDK7 is the reference implementation of JDK7
Hence, Oracle programmers work on OpenJDK 7 (and 8, and 9...).
The web browser
On 04.05.2013 00:01, Jim wrote:
> Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
>
> What Packages would I download ?
alternatives --config java ;)
poma
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedorapr
Fedora 18 ,is there openJRE instead of Oracles JRE ?
What Packages would I download ?
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki
* Antonio Olivares [2011-05-31 20:35]:
> Dear folks,
>
> I am happily running Fedora 15 on several boxes. Our school will be
> switching from VistaNet to PowerSchool Online systems by Pearsons. We used
> to do attendance/grading on Vistanet and now we will use Powerschool online
> Gradebook
On 01/06/11 01:35, Antonio Olivares wrote:
>
> I am happily running Fedora 15 on several boxes. Our school will be
> switching from VistaNet to PowerSchool Online systems by Pearsons.
> We used to do attendance/grading on Vistanet and now we will use
> Powerschool online Gradebook which appears t
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 6:48 PM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> On 06/01/2011 09:43 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> Oh, forgot to add
>>
>> What you really want is to do
>>
>> yum whatprovides *bin/java
>>
>> Ed
>
> Oh, and I think I was mistaken with my first answeras I didn't do
> what I said you shou
On 06/01/2011 09:43 AM, Ed Greshko wrote:
> Oh, forgot to add
>
> What you really want is to do
>
> yum whatprovides *bin/java
>
> Ed
Oh, and I think I was mistaken with my first answeras I didn't do
what I said you should do and was mislead by a symbolic link. Very
sorry
Anywa
Oh, forgot to add
What you really want is to do
yum whatprovides *bin/java
Ed
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_
On one of my machines I have
> java already as I run the testers:
>
> http://www.java.com/en/download/testjava.jsp
>
> and it returns that java is present.
>
> but there is no rpm reported back:
>
> [olivares@acer-aspire-1 ~]$ rpm -qa java
> [olivares@acer-aspire-1 ~]$
>
Dear folks,
I am happily running Fedora 15 on several boxes. Our school will be switching
from VistaNet to PowerSchool Online systems by Pearsons. We used to do
attendance/grading on Vistanet and now we will use Powerschool online Gradebook
which appears to need java to run. On one of my mac
libnpjp2.so 2
>> Obviously you need to type the above in a single line (it was broken
>> in pieces by the mailer).
> I put all three commands , shown above on one line with spaces between
> each command and it ran , but still no Jre in Firefox .
>
> /usr/lib/moz
On 17 October 2010 18:39, Jim wrote:
>> i believe you can rename that (or delete it) and it will be recreated
>> but that probably wont help.
>
> /pluginreg.dat has all the same thing that shows up in about:plugins
Exactly, that file is a sort of cache. If the file is deleted (thereby
possibly
On 10/17/2010 12:32 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 10/17/2010 12:26 PM, Jim wrote:
>>On 10/17/2010 12:18 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>>> On 10/17/2010 11:45 AM, Jim wrote:
>>>
>>> Go to about:plugins - and check for multiple versions of jre - if
On 17 October 2010 17:26, Jim wrote:
> There is nothing about jre or java in about:plugins ,
Things to try:
1. Do you still have in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins a
ln -s /usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so?
If so, and you added the other link to /libjavaplugin.so, then you can
remove t
On 10/17/2010 12:26 PM, Jim wrote:
> On 10/17/2010 12:18 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 10/17/2010 11:45 AM, Jim wrote:
>>
>>Go to about:plugins - and check for multiple versions of jre - if so
>> disable the undesirable ones.
>>
>>I dont use fir
On 10/17/2010 12:18 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 10/17/2010 11:45 AM, Jim wrote:
>
>Go to about:plugins - and check for multiple versions of jre - if so
> disable the undesirable ones.
>
>I dont use firefox anymore (switched to google-chrome) but I'm pretty
&
On 10/17/2010 11:45 AM, Jim wrote:
Go to about:plugins - and check for multiple versions of jre - if so
disable the undesirable ones.
I dont use firefox anymore (switched to google-chrome) but I'm pretty
sure there is a way to choose when conflicting plugins provide same service.
M
ve in a single line (it was broken
> in pieces by the mailer).
I put all three commands , shown above on one line with spaces between
each command and it ran , but still no Jre in Firefox .
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins has bothlibjavaplugin.so and libnpjp2.so
in it.
libjavaplugin.soi
On 17 October 2010 08:47, Piscium wrote:
> /usr/sbin/alternatives --install
> /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/libjavaplugin.so libjavaplugin.so
> /usr/java/default/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so 2
Obviously you need to type the above in a single line (it was broken
in pieces by the mailer).
--
users mailing
On 17 October 2010 03:20, Jim wrote:
> I ran the commands and everything compared, but when I ran;
>
> # /usr/sbin/alternatives --config libjavaplugin.so
>
> It ran , but I did not get the result shown below
>
>
> There is 1 program that provides 'libjavaplugin.so'.
>
> Selection Command
>
On 10/16/2010 07:27 PM, Piscium wrote:
> On 17 October 2010 00:15, Jim wrote:
>> I have in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins a ln -s
>> /usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/lib/i386/libnpjp2.sobut the jre won't show in
>> about:plugins .
>>
>> What am I missi
On 17 October 2010 00:15, Jim wrote:
> I have in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins a ln -s
> /usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so but the jre won't show in
> about:plugins .
>
> What am I missing
This is what I have (and it works):
[r...@dell-d
I have in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins a ln -s
/usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/lib/i386/libnpjp2.sobut the jre won't show in
about:plugins .
What am I missing
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/ma
6
java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0-42.b18.fc13.i686
java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-42.b18.fc13.i686
java_cup-0.11a-4.fc13.noarch
java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel-1.6.0.0-42.b18.fc13.i686
jre-1.6.0_21-fcs.i586
You should have a directory
/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
In that dir, there should be a symlink:
lrwxrwxr
On 10/12/2010 06:16 PM, JD wrote:
>On 10/12/2010 02:49 PM, jim wrote:
>> Fc13-i686 /Kde New install
>>
>> I have jre1.6.0_21 installed and ln -s to, in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>
>> There is no plugins directory in /usr/lib/firefox.
>>
>> I tried libjavaplugin_oji.so and libnpjp2.so but
tc/alternatives/libjavaplugin.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 42 Aug 31 09:31
/etc/alternatives/libjavaplugin.so ->
/usr/java/default/jre/lib/i386/libnpjp2.so
[23:13 s...@rackspace ~ ]
$ ls -al /usr/java/default
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 Mar 3 2010 /usr/java/default -> /usr/java/latest/
[23:13
On 10/12/2010 02:49 PM, jim wrote:
>Fc13-i686 /Kde New install
>
> I have jre1.6.0_21 installed and ln -s to, in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>
> There is no plugins directory in /usr/lib/firefox.
>
> I tried libjavaplugin_oji.so and libnpjp2.so but I can't get it to show
> after starting about:
Fc13-i686 /Kde New install
I have jre1.6.0_21 installed and ln -s to, in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
There is no plugins directory in /usr/lib/firefox.
I tried libjavaplugin_oji.so and libnpjp2.so but I can't get it to show
after starting about:plugins in firefox .
I wonder if there is another
Thanks to the suggestion of Pscium, I removed the openjdk and installed the
java jre. The non trivial instructions do to this are at:
fedorasolved.org/browser-solutions/java-i386
I use the x86_64 version of firefox, so used the 64 bit version of java jre.
Unfortunately, to see the problem
#x27;t doing a ln -s
>> /usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin.oji.so work anymore,
>> the link is showing in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>>
>> About:plugins in firefox does not show a jre plugin.
>>
>> Boy these changes every week can STRESS a guy out.
&g
On 08/10/2010 11:20 AM, fedora wrote:
> Did you check whether the IcedTea plugin is installed? The IcedTea
> plugin represents jre.
>
> if not installed do:
> yum install java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-41.b18.fc13.x86_64
>
> (select the right architecture)
>
>
nymore,
> the link is showing in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
>
> About:plugins in firefox does not show a jre plugin.
>
> Boy these changes every week can STRESS a guy out.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://adm
Did you check whether the IcedTea plugin is installed? The IcedTea
plugin represents jre.
if not installed do:
yum install java-1.6.0-openjdk-plugin-1.6.0.0-41.b18.fc13.x86_64
(select the right architecture)
suomi
On 2010-08-10 17:10, binary...@comcast.net wrote:
>FC13 i686
>
>
FC13 i686
Doesn't doing a ln -s
/usr/java/jre1.6.0_21/plugin/i386/ns7/libjavaplugin.oji.so work anymore,
the link is showing in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins
About:plugins in firefox does not show a jre plugin.
Boy these changes every week can STRESS a guy out.
--
users mailing list
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> Really, just check the java applet.
Sure.
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: htt
On 09/08/10 11:11, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>
>> That is why there are left various prior Sun Jre's,
>> that you can safely remove after a fresh update.
>> Have done it many times, the old stuff it still there.
>
>
> Oh, really.
Really, just c
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> That is why there are left various prior Sun Jre's,
> that you can safely remove after a fresh update.
> Have done it many times, the old stuff it still there.
Oh, really.
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fed
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 4:56 AM, James McKenzie
wrote:
> Not really. Sun's JRE will install over the top of an existing JRE
> install. However, if it breaks, you get to keep the results. I also
> have a lot of fun installing the JDK on Sun systems and RHEL/RHAS
> systems. W
On 09/08/10 00:26, James McKenzie wrote:
>>
>> You cannot update jre, it is always a full clean out (optional) and
>> reinstall.
>> Even on Windows
>>
>>
> Not really. Sun's JRE will install over the top of an existing JRE
> install. However, if
Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 02/08/10 13:22, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>>
>>
>> friend of fedora, i was asking for update only and not reinstalling!!
>>
>
> You cannot update jre, it is always a
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Reporting bugs is just fine but not in the language used by the
> reporter. If you are using for a bug to be fixed in a free software
> project, being polite would get you further along than ranting.
This is very correct.
--
Regards,
P
On 08/04/2010 12:45 PM, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Andrew Haley
>> LOL! Not very often, no.
>> Thanks for the sympathy. :-)
>
> Reporting bugs is good because many people see and the one who thinks
> for it, could resolve also or the community in aggregation.
Repo
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> LOL! Not very often, no.
> Thanks for the sympathy. :-)
Reporting bugs is good because many people see and the one who thinks
for it, could resolve also or the community in aggregation.
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Christofer C. Bell
wrote:
> Wow, the guy who reported that bug is a huge jerk. Do you all have to
> put up with that kind of name calling and general unpleasantness
> often?
Why do you say like that?
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lis
me asking, why do you need the Sun
>>>> JDK? Does the OpenJDK jre not work for what you are trying to do?
>>>
>>>
>>> Not a problem. I tries to play chess at,
>>>
>>> http://www.pogo.com/action/pogo/signin.do?returnType=game&returnValue=ches
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 9:31 AM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Parshwa Murdia [2010-08-03 05:29]:
>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>
>> > Out of curiosity -- if you don't mind me asking, why do you need the Sun
>> > JDK? Does the OpenJDK j
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> H. We may have to fix it eventually.
Yes, humans can do that also.
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/
On 08/03/2010 03:31 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Parshwa Murdia [2010-08-03 05:29]:
>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>
>>> Out of curiosity -- if you don't mind me asking, why do you need the Sun
>>> JDK? Does the OpenJDK jre
* Parshwa Murdia [2010-08-03 05:29]:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity -- if you don't mind me asking, why do you need the Sun
> > JDK? Does the OpenJDK jre not work for what you are trying to do?
>
>
> Not a p
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> Out of curiosity -- if you don't mind me asking, why do you need the Sun
> JDK? Does the OpenJDK jre not work for what you are trying to do?
Not a problem. I tries to play chess at,
http://www.pogo.com/action/pogo/signin.do?retu
* Parshwa Murdia [2010-08-02 08:10]:
> I have installed JRE (Sun Java) according to the website:
>
> http://sites.google.com/site/indiadoor/java-jre
>
> But the matter is that the installed version is JRE 1.6.0 Update 20
> and have disabled Open JDK, but how to update this
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> :)
:):)
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailin
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
> Sorry, because you used those instructions there is NO easy way to update.
> You need to redo *every* step.
Oh I see.
> You can undo all those steps and install the RPM.
> There are guides on the web on how to install the
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> You get to keep the pieces.
No, two parts are not pieces, more that that is pieces!
:)
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproje
On 02/08/10 16:25, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
>>
>>> If you install the Sun JRE using the RPM and made sure to setup the
>>> proper symlinks, then t
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
>
>> If you install the Sun JRE using the RPM and made sure to setup the
>> proper symlinks, then the update is just one single 'rpm' command.
>
>
On 02/08/10 16:09, Parshwa Murdia wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
>
>> You cannot update jre, it is always a full clean out (optional) and
>> reinstall.
>> Even on Windows
>
>
> Really?
You get to keep the pieces.
--
Regards,
Fra
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
> If you install the Sun JRE using the RPM and made sure to setup the
> proper symlinks, then the update is just one single 'rpm' command.
Oh, I installed using 'yum'!
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Mauriat Miranda wrote:
> If you install the Sun JRE using the RPM and made sure to setup the
> proper symlinks, then the update is just one single 'rpm' command.
I installed using the following:
http://sites.google.com/site/indiadoor/java-jre
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> You cannot update jre, it is always a full clean out (optional) and
> reinstall.
> Even on Windows
Really?
--
Regards,
Parshwa Murdia
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscriptio
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 8:23 AM, Frank Murphy wrote:
> You cannot update jre, it is always a full clean out (optional) and
> reinstall.
> Even on Windows
If you install the Sun JRE using the RPM and made sure to setup the
proper symlinks, then the update is just one single
1 - 100 of 109 matches
Mail list logo
