Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1319086 +++
Description of problem:
Jar archive /usr/share/java/libguestfs-1.20.11.jar contains classes, which are version '51' (java 7).
However package has set runtime requires as 'java >= 1.5.0'
If for whatever reason java 1.6.0 or less was installed, no class from the jar could be run because it is not compatible.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
libguestfs-java-1.20.11-14.el6
How reproducible:
always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. jar xf /usr/share/java/libguestfs-1.20.11.jar
2. find . -name '*class' -exec file {} \;
3. rpm -qR libguestfs-java
Actual results:
compiled Java class data, version 51.0 (Java 1.7)
java >= 1.5.0
Expected results:
java requirement always satisfies compiled java class version
Additional info:
BuildRequires list java-1.7.0-openjdk-devel, so it seems that only requires are too old.
========================================
The same issue applies for RHEL 7 -- albeit with different versions of libguestfs, of course.
Comment 1Richard W.M. Jones
2017-02-16 13:59:22 UTC
Pino is this fixed by c39d5e89c3b3884309cfaea16721b9ec25c98868?
(In reply to Richard W.M. Jones from comment #1)
> Pino is this fixed by c39d5e89c3b3884309cfaea16721b9ec25c98868?
Don't think so, as the code removed did not do much. Indeed, the bytecode version was already for java 7.
Comment 4Richard W.M. Jones
2017-02-16 15:00:29 UTC
OK, got it, the fix is:
%package java
Summary: Java bindings for %{name}
Requires: %{name} = %{epoch}:%{version}-%{release}
-Requires: java-headless >= 1.5.0
+Requires: java-headless >= 1.7.0
Requires: jpackage-utils
This was already done in the RHEL 6 branch.
Verified with package:
libguestfs-1.36.3-1.el7.x86_64
libguestfs-java-1.36.3-1.el7.x86_64
Steps:
1. jar xf /usr/share/java/libguestfs.jar
2. find . -name '*class' -exec file {} \;
./com/redhat/et/libguestfs/Application.class: compiled Java class data, version 51.0 (Java 1.7)
./com/redhat/et/libguestfs/Application2.class: compiled Java class data, version 51.0 (Java 1.7)
...
3. rpm -qR libguestfs-java
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
java-headless >= 1.7.0
...
Actual results:
compiled Java class data, version 51.0 (Java 1.7)
java-headless >= 1.7.0
Java requirement can be able to satisfy compiled java class version.
So verified.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.
For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.
If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.
https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2017:2023