Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36734 > unrolled thread

JDK vs JRE

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  JDK vs JRE Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-06-26 12:22 -0700
    Re: JDK vs JRE Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-06-26 20:50 +0000
    Re: JDK vs JRE Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-06-26 19:21 -0400
    Re: JDK vs JRE lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-06-27 12:35 -0700

#36734 — JDK vs JRE

I tried searching for differences and all I'm seeing is the obvious, the JDK contains the JRE plus the development tools.
Other than a somewhat larger footprint, is there any harm in end users who only need a JRE installing a JDK?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36736

On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 12:22:38 -0700, Eric Douglas wrote:

> I tried searching for differences and all I'm seeing is the obvious, the
> JDK contains the JRE plus the development tools.
> Other than a somewhat larger footprint, is there any harm in end users
> who only need a JRE installing a JDK?

I'd think that depends on the organisation's policies. Many organisations 
won't allow development tools on production systems or PCs because 
disallowing them somewhat limits the damage that an intruder or an idle 
curious user can do, e.g. disallowing interactive SQL utilities makes it 
that much harder for an unauthorised person to damage a relational 
database or steal data from it.

Also, many smaller orgs may find it simpler to completely remove 
development tools from production systems than to set up a completely 
watertight way of restricting their use to developer logins.

Of course, its a non-issue if the organisation's main data store is 
effectively just a set of NAS boxes with all user applications running on 
PCs, but as soon as any user-accessible functions (apart from the RDBMS) 
are located on servers, then becomes the CSO should think about and 
develop policies for. 

I was used to working in environments where developers don't have access 
to the live systems and the live systems don't have development tools 
installed apart from that needed by Ops to keep the system's running. 

Quite a lot of these environments minimise hardware costs by having 
swappable live and backup systems. Developers use the backup system but 
will get summarily thrown off if the live system fails in such a way that 
the best recovery option is to swap over the development and production 
disk arrays and reboot the backup system off the production disk array.  
 

-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36738

On 6/26/2017 3:22 PM, Eric Douglas wrote:
> I tried searching for differences and all I'm seeing is the obvious,
> the JDK contains the JRE plus the development tools. Other than a
> somewhat larger footprint, is there any harm in end users who only
> need a JRE installing a JDK?

If you by end users mean normal desktop PC's, then I don't see
any particular good reasons for not to install JDK. The extra
MB's is insignificant by todays standard.

Servers are different. Your company may very likely prohibit
all development tools on production servers to control what
software is there.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36741

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 12:22:47 PM UTC-7, Eric Douglas wrote:
> I tried searching for differences and all I'm seeing is the obvious, the JDK contains the JRE plus the development tools.
> Other than a somewhat larger footprint, is there any harm in end users who only need a JRE installing a JDK?

No.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web