Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #35743
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-10-10 05:07 -0700 |
| References | <988350a8-29b9-4340-81ca-cf5082dc05c7@googlegroups.com> <ntatqk$9dh$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| Message-ID | <bd4d67a1-e82a-4a6d-94d7-5e583ba35f7b@googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| Subject | Re: Warning, bad Java |
| From | Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> |
On Saturday, October 8, 2016 at 9:54:39 AM UTC-4, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > Well - that is why Oracle put out the N and N+1 versions. > > N is the safe choice. N+1 is latest and greatest. > > I think that in general N+1 are quite safe. But there is > a risk. And apparently something slipped into 102. > > It does probably not help that JNLP is so little used as > it is. Less focus. > > Arne The past several releases they've had an N and N+1. I used the N+1 since I thought it would just be better (security patches? new features that shouldn't hurt existing code?) and they were fine previously. You'd think it should be bug free when they call it public release, and when they fix a critical bug like this they should get it into the public release, but they just put the fix into the beta 122. I downloaded 122 and it seems fine, if not better, there may be performance enhancements. I didn't see a workaround for this, some way to tell my thread to timeout and move on if it hits this deadlock, so our only solution is to install 101 on every client, now that we've already pushed 102 through group policy which doesn't seem to want to remove it.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Warning, bad Java Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 08:32 -0700
Re: Warning, bad Java j4n bur53 <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2016-10-07 22:37 +0200
Re: Warning, bad Java j4n bur53 <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2016-10-07 22:59 +0200
Re: Warning, bad Java Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2016-10-08 12:00 +0200
Re: Warning, bad Java Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-10-08 09:54 -0400
Re: Warning, bad Java Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-10 05:07 -0700
Re: Warning, bad Java Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2016-10-10 09:17 -0400
csiph-web