new JDK released 1.7.0_03

[Roedy Green]

a new JDK was just released 1.7.0_03.

Hints on installing will be posted soon at
http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jdk.html
and http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jre.html

It is pretty straightforward, so long as you remember to get 32/64 bit
or both.

 

[Jan Burse]

a new JDK was just released 1.7.0_03.

Hints on installing will be posted soon at
http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jdk.html
and http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jre.html

It is pretty straightforward, so long as you remember to get 32/64 bit
or both.

Did it fix the keyboard on Mac OS?

So far openjdk 1.7 was not usable on Mac OS, the
option modifier did not work, no chance to type
[ ] | { } from a swiss german keyboard.

Exactly same application works with openjdk 1.6,
the Swing text component handles the keyboard
correctly.

Bye

 

[Roedy Green]

Did it fix the keyboard on Mac OS?

This was from Oracle, the mainstream version, not Open JDK. I think
mostly it was about timezone/DST trivia updates and the usual security
stuff.

 

[markspace]

Did it fix the keyboard on Mac OS?

Java Update 3 release notes. They don't say anything about Mac OS
though, afaics.

<http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u3-relnotes-1481928.html>

Looks like Java 1.7.0_03 has some Security Baseline stuff (I didn't read
what that is), there's Java SE 7u3 updates for the Java plugin and for
some security vulnerabilities.

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

a new JDK was just released 1.7.0_03.

Hints on installing will be posted soon at
http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jdk.html
and http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jre.html

It is pretty straightforward, so long as you remember to get 32/64 bit
or both.

Did it fix the keyboard on Mac OS?

So far openjdk 1.7 was not usable on Mac OS, the
option modifier did not work, no chance to type
[ ] | { } from a swiss german keyboard.

Exactly same application works with openjdk 1.6,
the Swing text component handles the keyboard
correctly.

It was Oracle Java that was released not OpenJDK.

As far as I can see then OpenJDK does not even
have a u3 only u2 and u4.

To find out whether it is fixed or not
you should probably read commit comments
in Mercurial.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

This was from Oracle, the mainstream version, not Open JDK.

OpenJDK is actually supposed to be RI, but it has not
really taken over yet.

Arne

 

[Fredrik Jonson]

As far as I can see then OpenJDK does not even have a u3 only
u2 and u4.

It seems that oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security updates,
while feature releases are even numbered. I'm not suprised that they do the
even numbered releases out in the open with openjdk, while keeping the odd
releases with security fixes secret as long as possible.

I haven't seen this policy stated authoritively publicly anywhere, but the
pattern of changes in the three updates of jdk 7 sure seems to support it.

 

[Lew]

It seems that oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security updates,
while feature releases are even numbered. I'm not suprised that they do the
even numbered releases out in the open with openjdk, while keeping the odd
releases with security fixes secret as long as possible.

What the ...?

I haven't seen this policy stated authoritively publicly anywhere, but the
pattern of changes in the three updates of jdk [sic] 7 sure seems to support it.

Maybe because that isn't the policy and the three updates of Oracle's Java 7
completely disprove the notion.

Java 1.7.0_1 had both security and feature changes, 1.7.0_02 had both security
and feature changes, and 1.7.0_03 had both security and and non-security
changes.

 

[Fredrik Jonson]

Maybe because that isn't the policy and the three updates of Oracle's
Java 7 completely disprove the notion.

Maybe You're correct, I'm no authority, just calling it as I see it. I'm
curious, do you have a authoritative source for your statement?

Java 1.7.0_1 had both security and feature changes, 1.7.0_02 had both
security and feature changes, and 1.7.0_03 had both security and and
non-security changes.

I must confess that after the reorganization after Oracle bought Sun I find
the changelogs harder to interpret. I can't seem to find the full list of
all bugs fixed in a release in the relase notes anymore. Didn't Sun usually
include a long table of all fixes in the relase notes? Or was that another
document? Compare with the table "Other Bug fixes" below:

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/6u22releasenotes-176121.html

Anyway, back on topic. Let me quote from the release notes:

In update 1:
"Bug Fixes This release contains fixes for security vulnerabilities. For
more information, please see Oracle Java SE Critical Patch Update advisory."

update 2:
"Bug Fixes Java SE 7u2 does not add any fixes for security vulnerabilities
beyond those in Java SE 7u1. Users who have Java SE 7u1 have the latest
security fixes and do not need to upgrade to this release to be current on
security fixes."

update 3:
"Bug Fixes This release contains fixes for security vulnerabilities. For
more information, see Oracle Java SE Critical Patch Update Advisory."

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u1-relnotes-507962.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u2-relnotes-1394228.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u3-relnotes-1481928.html

I'd be happy to be proven wrong, and I'd be greatful if anyone could help
me find a more complete list of issues relsolved for each 7uN release.

 

[Lew]

Maybe You're correct, I'm no authority, just calling it as I see it. I'm
curious, do you have a authoritative source for your statement?

Yes, I looked it up on Oracle's Java page. They issue release notes for every
version. Most professional software companies do. The release notes describe
what was done in the release. Their link is right there on the page for the
download, right after the "ReadMe" link. You can't miss it.

I must confess that after the reorganization after Oracle bought Sun I find
the changelogs harder to interpret. I can't seem to find the full list of
all bugs fixed in a release in the relase notes anymore. Didn't Sun usually
include a long table of all fixes in the relase notes? Or was that another
document? Compare with the table "Other Bug fixes" below:

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/6u22releasenotes-176121.html

Anyway, back on topic. Let me quote from the release notes:

In update 1:
"Bug Fixes This release contains fixes for security vulnerabilities. For
more information, please see Oracle Java SE Critical Patch Update advisory."

Selective quotation proves nothing, and is intellectually dishonest.
Update 1 also includes:
"Olson Data 2011g", fixed "RMI Registry Issue", fixed "JIT and Loop Bugs",
"Other Bug Fixes".

update 2:
"Bug Fixes Java SE 7u2 does not add any fixes for security vulnerabilities
beyond those in Java SE 7u1. Users who have Java SE 7u1 have the latest
security fixes and do not need to upgrade to this release to be current on
security fixes."

And yet they also cite "Enhanced Security Through Old Release Warnings".

update 3:
"Bug Fixes This release contains fixes for security vulnerabilities. For
more information, see Oracle Java SE Critical Patch Update Advisory."

And of course that's *all* it contains, right? Oh, wait, except for "Other Bug
Fixes". There's that selective quotation thing again!

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u1-relnotes-507962.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u2-relnotes-1394228.html
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/7u3-relnotes-1481928.html

I'd be happy to be proven wrong, and I'd be greatful [sic] if anyone could help
me find a more complete list of issues relsolved for each 7uN release.

 

[Fredrik Jonson]

Yes, I looked it up on Oracle's Java page. They issue release notes for
every version.

Hey, Lew, I know that. And you know that I know because I actually link to
no less than three release notes only a few sentences further down in the
message from me that you quote.

I was asking for a reference that explicitly documents Oracles release
system and especially if they have - or do not have - any form of a even/odd
release schedule or something in that way.

 

[Lew]

Hey, Lew, I know that. And you know that I know because I actually link to
no less than three release notes only a few sentences further down in the
message from me that you quote.

Yes, that is correct. I did not deny knowing that.

I was asking for a reference that explicitly documents Oracles release
system and especially if they have - or do not have - any form of a even/odd
release schedule or something in that way.

Those links *are* such a reference. You are all proud of having cited them.
Now read them and you'll see that the releases all three contain security
update aspects and all three contain non-security aspects. The release notes
clearly refute that hypothesis. Question asked and fully answered. Several
times.

 

[Volker Borchert]

It seems that oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security updates,
while feature releases are even numbered. I'm not suprised that they do the
even numbered releases out in the open with openjdk, while keeping the odd
releases with security fixes secret as long as possible.

I have been wondering for some time why they put major changes into
updates rather than teeny versions, e.g. 1.6.0_10 rather than 1.6.1

 

[Fredrik Jonson]

It seems that Oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security
updates, while feature releases are even numbered. [...] I haven't seen
this policy stated authoritively publicly anywhere, but the pattern of
changes in the three updates of jdk 7 sure seems to support it.

Interestingly the hypothesis above has now been publicly documented by Oracle:

"Change to Java SE 7 and Java SE 6 Update Release Numbers

[...] To date all Critical Patch Updates (CPUs) for Java 7 have been odd
numbers (JDK 7 Update 1, i.e. 7u1, 7u3, 7u5, etc.), while limited update
releases have been even numbers (7u2, 7u4, 7u6, etc.)."

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-update-release-numbers-change-1836624.html

 

[Lew]

It seems that Oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security
updates, while feature releases are even numbered. [...] I haven't seen
this policy stated authoritively publicly anywhere, but the pattern of
changes in the three updates of jdk 7 sure seems to support it.

Interestingly the hypothesis above has now been publicly documented by Oracle:

"Change to Java SE 7 and Java SE 6 Update Release Numbers
[...] To date all Critical Patch Updates (CPUs) for Java 7 have been odd
numbers (JDK 7 Update 1, i.e. 7u1, 7u3, 7u5, etc.), while limited update
releases have been even numbers (7u2, 7u4, 7u6, etc.)."

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-update-release-numbers-change-1836624.html

Actually, that's different from the hypothesis.

The hypothesis as stated is that Oracle "has reserved" the numbers as stated. Oracle only has
confirmed that "to date" it has happened that way.