Package Details: jdk7 7u80-1

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: jdk7
Description: Oracle Java 7 Development Kit (public release - end of support)
Upstream URL:
Keywords: java-environment-jdk java-openjfx java-runtime-headless-jre java-runtime-jre java-web-start-jre
Licenses: custom:Oracle
Provides: java-environment=7, java-environment-jdk=7, java-openjfx=7, java-runtime=7, java-runtime-headless=7, java-runtime-headless-jre=7, java-runtime-jre=7, java-web-start=7, java-web-start-jre=7
Submitter: joschi
Maintainer: severach
Last Packager: severach
Votes: 135
Popularity: 0.000014
First Submitted: 2013-09-11 18:22
Last Updated: 2020-07-23 00:42

Required by (1000)

Sources (7)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... Next › Last »

Det commented on 2014-09-10 02:27

That's fine. My response:

Anonymous comment on 2014-09-09 22:23

ok, again this thread is for the naming issue:
Pleas come to a conclission to this nameing differences.

Anonymous comment on 2014-09-09 22:22

For the naimg issue I bring this thread:

Det commented on 2014-09-09 16:25

So just relaying the same thing here: because the path for OpenJDK 8 was chosen as '/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk' (java-<major version>-<project name>), I simply preferred making mine 'java-8-jdk' (not 'java-8-oracle'), because the actual name of the project is 'JDK', not 'Oracle JDK', and it also creates consistency with the man pages:

$ man java-openjdk8
$ man java-jdk8

Instead of:

$ man java-openjdk8
$ man java8-oracle

Which also made me change the following dependencies:

- java-runtime-headless-oracle
- java-runtime-oracle
- java-web-start-oracle
- java-environment-oracle


- java-runtime-headless-jre
- java-runtime-jre
- java-web-start-jre
- java-environment-jdk (a JDK component)

Even if all of those end up being '-jdk' for "simplicity", I'd still prefer that setup, than the whole excessive "Oracle" tagging. The 'java8-oracle' (jre8-oracle/jdk8-oracle) package was already replaced with my implementation, so I assume the devs think it's fine as long as it works and doesn't conflict.

However, you're part of the whole Java scheme in Arch also, so I'd like your input on this as well so we can reach a consensus on the standard.

russo79 commented on 2014-09-09 11:28


jre8-oracle was recently merged with jre [1].


rafaelff commented on 2014-09-09 02:48


In the PKGBUILD you disabled JAVA plugin ( installation because it "conflicts with jre8-oracle". However I notice jre8-oracle is not in AUR, so I suppose you have it locally. Please install this plugin and later, when you submit jre8-oracle, you re-think this action.

rafaelff commented on 2014-09-09 02:47


In the PKGBUILD you disable JAVA plugin ( installation because it conflicts with jre8-oracle. However I notice jre8-oracle is not in AUR. Please install this plugin and later, when you submit jre8-oracle, you re-think this action.

Anonymous comment on 2014-09-08 20:56

@joschi the why not ask for a mergin and add the provided to jdk-oracle (proivides=jdk7) to the respective package package_jdk7-oracle(provides=jdk7) or something?

I ask fot the merge but they want you do the fist step.

joschi commented on 2014-09-05 07:00

@Jristz: jdk7-oracle (and jre7-oracle) follow the new package name scheme (just like jdk7-openjdk and jre7-openjdk from the official package repository) and support the new `archlinux-java` conventions.

As a matter of fact *this* very package is likely to be removed in the future.

Anonymous comment on 2014-09-05 04:36

@joschi: Well then the package that need to be removed is jdk7-oracle because the common schene is use only jdk{number if apply} fot the package, and unles jdk7-oracle provide something different that jdk7 not have I think is better remove jdk7-oracle.