Heads up - 1.4.2_05 released

General Discussions
#1

Once more, in a wave of silent quietness, and no publicity at all, a major new version of java was released.

Not major, you say? Just have a look at the bugfix list!

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/ReleaseNotes.html

[] Blocking Selector stops Blocking occasionally
[] (bf) Allocating direct buffers causes OutOfMemoryError
[] JVM crash with error “Fatal: null exception in compiled code”
[] onscreen objects flicker when apps on Windows call Toolkit.sync()
[*] Sun JDK 1.4.2 JWS does not recognize OS architecture “x86”; not compatible with

…all of which I believe I’ve suffered from ;D.

#2

What’s up with the automatic updater? >:(
Isn’t it supposed to figure out that a new version has been released or am I missing something here ???

#3

[quote]What’s up with the automatic updater? >:(
Isn’t it supposed to figure out that a new version has been released or am I missing something here ???
[/quote]
It’s been broken for a looooong time, apparently - Sun hasn’t considered fixing it all that important ;). Nah, I haven’t actually checked the bug report, but when it happened to me that 1.4.2_03 was broken, several people told me this was a long-standing problem. At the very least, it doesn’t detect _ updates.

Which is actually quite sensible.

What’s mind-screwingly stupid is the decision to publish MAJOR updates in a “release that is not a release” and refusing to increment the version number. It’s Sun’s new versioning scheme - all versions of 1.5 will be 1.5.0 - just, 1.5.0_1 up to 1.5.0_25, etc .

In all honesty, I think it’s another of those “clever” ideas by Sun’s marketing dept (responsible for so many own-goals over the years…). I reckon they’re trying to “prove” to the world that:

  1. Java is a mature platform
  2. Sun knows what regression, unit, and system tests are

Since both have historically been kind of difficult to believe given track record (basic bugs STILL appear in the core libraries, like java.util, or Swing, that should have been detected by “obvious” unit tests…), this scheme of never updating the version number - making it look like there weren’t any bugs to fix - pretends that both issues are resolved.

#4

That is quite a bug list…

…but, have there been any annoucements (at JavaOne or anywhere else) as to when 1.5 will be released?

#5

from the site:

[quote]Update releases are bug fix releases and as such are not intended to add to or delete functionality in the original 1.4.2 release.
[/quote]
Sure they’re major updates but the API is identicle so I can understand why they don’t incremeent the minor version number. After all, they may be bugs which other brand’s of java don’t suffer.

Perhaps they could do more to push the updates out however.

Will.

#6

[quote]from the site:

Sure they’re major updates but the API is identicle so I can understand why they don’t incremeent the minor version number. After all, they may be bugs which other brand’s of java don’t suffer.
[/quote]
But sun staff have said here that exactly the same “no addition or removal” applies to all 1.4.x releases - which is pretty normal for a software product. What is abnormal is that the z in x.y.z now appears entirely irrelevant in Sun’s naming scheme.

#7

I believe the way it works is that the autoupdater only downloads on minor revision updates (the 2 in 1.4.2_05). You do NOT want to be ticking off users by updating on the _x revisions which come out every couple of months or so (unless the fixes are major security bugs). You do that and they’ll simply turn off the autoupdater.

#8

I don’t follow that logic. The _0x updates are bug fixes for things that are broken. I want them fixed, ASAP. Always.

Cas :slight_smile:

#9

[quote]I believe the way it works is that the autoupdater only downloads on minor revision updates (the 2 in 1.4.2_05). You do NOT want to be ticking off users by updating on the _x revisions which come out every couple of months or so (unless the fixes are major security bugs). You do that and they’ll simply turn off the autoupdater.
[/quote]
Hey, that’s really wonderful, but … go and read the list of fixes. We’re talking really major stuff here - so much so that I have prototypical games that people won’t be able to run, period, if I developed them after the bugs were fixed (as it is, I believe i have workarounds in place for them…but in some cases at large performance cost).

#10

Sun just convinced me - via their godlike marketing dept - NOT to try Netbeans

(because I’m reformatting linux) I’ve moved over to a win2k box for now, and discovered the JVM was a bit behind (1.4.0!). So, I went to java.sun.com, and thought “what the heck; I’ll try netbeans 3.6 - Gosling was saying the other day that it’s lean, fast, and wonderful”. But then my eagle eyes noticed that if you do this it forces you into downloading “1.4.2_04” - yes, folks, that version that’s missing the large number of major bugfixes from _05.

I confess, I’m beginning to wonder if the people that run java.sun.com are actually IBM engineers or something ??? :smiley:

Things like this, and all the upgrade problems noted earlier in this thread AND the mind-bending stuff about “Java Desktop != Desktop Java” etc AND their refusal to let/encourage people to link to the “automatic JVM installer” on sun.com (which is what JGF links to, because it’s a one click install!) Sun would have you link to a page where the user has to pick an OS and a version and jump through a flaming hoop singing “three blind mice” - at least, if you want to use the “GET JAVA HERE” logo they legally prevent you from linking to the one-click install :frowning: Sob).

Sun Microsystems these days has such multiple-personality disorder :P. Some very good people doing great work, and lots of others pulling in the opposite direction for no know reason :(.

#11

[quote]Sun just convinced me - via their godlike marketing dept - NOT to try Netbeans

(because I’m reformatting linux) I’ve moved over to a win2k box for now, and discovered the JVM was a bit behind (1.4.0!). So, I went to java.sun.com, and thought “what the heck; I’ll try netbeans 3.6 - Gosling was saying the other day that it’s lean, fast, and wonderful”. But then my eagle eyes noticed that if you do this it forces you into downloading “1.4.2_04” - yes, folks, that version that’s missing the large number of major bugfixes from _05.
[/quote]
Whoa, whoa, whoa! Slow down there blah! You don’t have to download the latest JVM. The bundle on java.sun.com is one of those “easy to install” packages that supposed to get you up and running faster. In my experience, it does no such thing. The bundle is really Sun’s way of marketing and endorsing Netbeans. My guess is that they don’t update the JVM versions very often because the bundle has to go through “certification” every time.

You’re much better off visiting Netbeans.org and downloading the latest version. Not only will you be able to use the most recent JDK, but you’ll also be able to download betas of Netbeans’ latest goodies.

FWIW, I use Netbeans for all of my development. Its upside is that it’s feature rich, keeps out of your way, and works in a way natural to how Java functions (i.e. mounting classpaths instead of adding individual files). Its only downside is that it eats memory like it was freshly made taffy from a candy store. So if you want to use it, make sure your machine has at least 512MB of RAM.

[quote]I confess, I’m beginning to wonder if the people that run java.sun.com are actually IBM engineers or something ??? :smiley:
[/quote]
No worries. IBM and Sun tend to cross-pollinate their engineers and managers! :wink:

#12

c.f. this for more sun 1.4.2_05 madness:

http://www.java-gaming.org/cgi-bin/JGNetForums/YaBB.cgi?board=announcements;action=display;num=1090529561

re: netbeans. I don’t disagree - however, the NETBEANS + JAVA link (that, by the way, is conveniently positioned so that more than one person I know has accidentally clicked on it when they didn’t even want netbeans, because you assume the biggest link on a page where you’ve already said what you want to download would be the latest version of what you’re trying to download!) is an attempt to make it easy and encourage people to use it. Surreptitiously hiding the fact that you aren’t actually downloading the latest version of java does not seem a wise (or honest) thing to be doing :(.

What if you already had 1.4.2_05 and came to this page? You’d end up downloading the JVM you already had AND not getting the one you came for! (unless you were careful to read the metaphorical smallprint)

#13

[quote]c.f. this for more sun 1.4.2_05 madness:

http://www.java-gaming.org/cgi-bin/JGNetForums/YaBB.cgi?board=announcements;action=display;num=1090529561
[/quote]
That’s pretty old news. Sun’s been doing the whole “one download” thing for as long as I can remember. Also, the JDK size has been creeping up for a long time. Adding soundbanks, new APIs, Java Web Start, Autoupdate, and other goodies doesn’t come free. As long as the JRE stays pretty small, I’ll be happy.

[quote]What if you already had 1.4.2_05 and came to this page? You’d end up downloading the JVM you already had AND not getting the one you came for! (unless you were careful to read the metaphorical smallprint)
[/quote]
Yep. Sun does tend to stumble over their own feet. I remember the nice and simple days of Java 1.1. There was one JVM download, one link to the JavaDocs, and one link to the tutorials. Seems complexity always manages to sneak in and ruin everything.

EDIT: Clarification

#14

Last time I was installing windows (I guess 1.4.something) the JDK downloads were same size betwixt windows and linux.

The linux download size has barely moved, whereas the windows one has doubled.

This is what troubles me.

What amazes me is that 1.4.2_05 claims it REQUIRES 120Mb for the JRE plus 120Mb for the JDK, and even if you remove the JRE it still ends up refusing to install unless you have twice what it claimed it needed.