I keep getting a KDE notification saying that “A security trust relationship is not present” and that the “Signature verification for Repository Sun_Java failed”. How can I shut this up? These are the instructions I followed to install real Java but there was no mention of any encryption keys. I couldn’t find anything through Google on shutting it up either, and it’s sending me round the twist! Other things about Linux/KDE have been gradually irritating me of late but nothing more than this constant annoyance has made me seriously ponder switching to Mac as much as this before.
On 2012-10-12 09:16, marcfearby wrote:
>
> I keep getting a KDE notification saying that “A security trust
> relationship is not present” and that the “Signature verification for
> Repository Sun_Java failed”. How can I shut this up?
Remove the repo.
You can not install sun java from any repo, license change.
Use manual method described on link, or use different java distributor.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” (Minas Tirith))
Regardless of which repo I choose to use to install Java, is there no way to tell the package manager to shut up and stop complaining about the signature? Installing Java manually is going to result it one thing: an out of date, forgotten, and insecure, Java runtime environment. At least with a repository it’ll be kept up-to-date.
Noticing that the offending message was coming from Apper, I’ve turned off “Show a message in a popup” in System Notification Configuration for the “A transaction error occurred” setting and - so far (fingers crossed - it seems to have shut it up well and good 
My need to grudgingly switch to Mac to shut my brother up has been averted for a while yet.
On 2012-10-13 03:46, marcfearby wrote:
>
> robin_listas;2495443 Wrote:
>> Remove the repo.
>> You can not install sun java from any repo, license change.
>> Use manual method described on link, or use different java distributor.
>
> Regardless of which repo I choose to use to install Java, is there no
> way to tell the package manager to shut up and stop complaining about
> the signature? Installing Java manually is going to result it one thing:
> an out of date, forgotten, and insecure, Java runtime environment. At
> least with a repository it’ll be kept up-to-date.
Again: Sun’s java (jre) is not published in any repository in anywhere, forget it. You have to
install it manually, and download it manually yourself. Remove that repository and the error will
disappear.
And again, there are other javas, from other vendors, that you can install from the standard oss repo.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” (Minas Tirith))
My bad… I remember trying several things to get “real Java” installed under openSUSE and that the URL I linked above was simply a guide to install it manually. The “Sun_Java” repo I currently have looks like it must have been - at some stage - an official repo (Index of /repositories/Java:/packages/openSUSE_12.2). I can’t remember how I found out about that but I obviously found it somewhere. I wonder why it’s still available if it’s apparently so bad nobody should use it anymore?
BTW, the various oss Java offerings have issues with the software I’m using, so I have to have the genuine article.
Any repository with “orgy” in its name isn’t likely to stand the test of time. The whole Java licensing situation really annoys me, and yes, I know it’s not Linux’s fault, and Oracle bear much of the blame… but it could be more straight forward than it currently is. Perhaps some “official” guidance from openSUSE on which repositories to use/trust or an official manual install guide would be a massive benefit to us poor unfortunate souls who need “real” java.
It’s an OBS members /home: build
If you prefer a different name I can humour you
Index of /repositories/home:/deltafox/openSUSE_12.2
So apparently openSUSE **can still **distribute Java? Why not put it in some semi-official repository? When I used Debian such things were kept in /non-free (though I don’t know whether even Debian distributes Java any more). So if Sun Java can be hosted by openSUSE with strange-named repos, why not go the next level and make it official, and stop all this chicanery users have to go through?
You are arguing your point with the wrong guy
I was just trying to helpful
Take it or leave it
On 2012-10-13 08:46, marcfearby wrote:
>
> So apparently openSUSE *can still *distribute Java? Why not put it in
> some semi-official repository? When I used Debian such things were kept
> in /non-free (though I don’t know whether even Debian distributes Java
> any more). So if Sun Java can be hosted by openSUSE with strange-named
> repos, why not go the next level and make it official, and stop all this
> chicanery users have to go through?
Those home repos may find their privileges removed for breach of conditions of use.
If you need JRE, the only correct method is the one described in the howto you posted at the start,
the google document. If instead of the tgz you use the rpm, upgrades are just as easy the following
time.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” (Minas Tirith))
There is a semi-official repo you might try. It’s not Sun, but it might address the problems you’re having.
That’s the same repo I was using and which prompted my original inquiry about shutting up its complaint about signature verification.
I think robin_listas is right. Only way is manual method, unfortunately. It’ll just have to do until Oracle donates Java to the open-source community (when hell freezes over, most likely).
On 2012-10-14 02:16, marcfearby wrote:
> I think robin_listas is right. Only way is manual method,
> unfortunately. It’ll just have to do until Oracle donates Java to the
> open-source community (when hell freezes over, most likely).
But there is something I don’t understand: those repos do not have the
java version from Sun, they have different versions: I see gcj, but not
icedtea :-?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
I think it would be helpful if all these “not Javas” would just crawl away and die. They’re as evil as “Microsoft Java” long ago where you couldn’t trust Java to be Java. “Not Javas” are a misguided attempt to recreate the JRE but somehow just aren’t quite right and the result is Balkanisation of Java. If Sun/Oracle don’t license it properly, then turn the other cheek and use something else, but for the love of god, why fragment it and make developers’ and users’ lives harder?
Sorry, I had to get that off my chest. Microsoft were pilloried for the same crimes now being committed by the folks trying to come up with a Java that passes the license test but doesn’t pass the usability test.
I hope everybody is aware that now with version 7 the GPL OpenJDK is
“the” offical Java (Oracle decided that way) and that the proprietary
Java version from Oracle is just one implementation which has to be
compatible with the reference Java OpenJDK 7.
Sure such things like incompatibilities which still exist do not go away
over night, but since they (Oracle) did that move, they will go away.
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GeForce GT 420
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.2 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server
On 2012-10-14 14:17, Martin Helm wrote:
> I hope everybody is aware that now with version 7 the GPL OpenJDK is
> “the” offical Java (Oracle decided that way) and that the proprietary
> Java version from Oracle is just one implementation which has to be
> compatible with the reference Java OpenJDK 7.
> Sure such things like incompatibilities which still exist do not go away
> over night, but since they (Oracle) did that move, they will go away.
Just a naive question
Suppose that the Sun/Oracle implementation is incorrect and different.
Suppose also that, say, my bank, design their software with that
version. I would also have to use the Sun/Oracle version, and the point
that OpenJDK be the reference implementation would be moot - would it not?
(I’d hate that situation)
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
On 2012-10-14 16:08, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2012-10-14 14:17, Martin Helm wrote:
>> I hope everybody is aware that now with version 7 the GPL OpenJDK is
>> “the” offical Java (Oracle decided that way) and that the proprietary
I just had a search for openjdk in 12.1, and I only see 1_6_0 version.
Where is version 7?
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
Am 14.10.2012 16:08, schrieb Carlos E. R.:
> Just a naive question
>
> Suppose that the Sun/Oracle implementation is incorrect and different.
> Suppose also that, say, my bank, design their software with that
> version. I would also have to use the Sun/Oracle version, and the point
> that OpenJDK be the reference implementation would be moot - would it not?
>
> (I’d hate that situation)
>
Of course, since reality always beats theory.
But the same and even worse will happen (and such things do happen) if
they decide to implement their banking stuff for a special version of
Java and even worse use operating system specific features from the
windows platform for example.
Even if it will then run there happily with OpenJDK it will not run on
anything which is not Windows, whatever you install and whatever you do.
And such an programming error can be as trivial as relying on \ as path
separator by the programmer or other stupid things.
–
PC: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.5 | GeForce GT 420
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.2 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.9.2 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 11.4 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | lamp server