New updates for ColdFusion 9, 9,0.1, 9.0.2 and 10 – Java 7 now supported

[Update: All the technotes ( for CF10, CF9, CF9.0.1 and CF9.0.2) now have an update section to reflect the change that was made. The refreshed CHFs for ColdFusion 9 and the refreshed ColdFusion 10 update 8 contains a fix for the an issue in Google Maps. New CHFs have been released for CF9 and CF9.0.1 – Read the related post here]


The new cumulative hotfix for ColdFusion 9.0, 9.0.1, 9.0.2 includes support for Google Maps JavaScript API v3 and JDK 1.7 Update 15.These Cumulative Hotfixes consists of previously released cumulative hotfixes and security updates.

Details of cumulative hotfixes are here – 9.0, 9.0.1, 9.0.2


ColdFusion 10 Update 8 includes support for Google Maps JavaScript API v3, Mac OS X Mountain Lion 10.8 and JDK 1.7 Update 15. It includes all the bug fixes from previous updates of ColdFusion 10. 

You apply this update using the update mechanism within ColdFusion 10 Administrator.

For more details about the update, refer the link here.



60 Responses

  1. @David: We will have someone from the team respond to your query. And yes, we will be updating the page that you have pointed out. Thanks for letting us know!

    @Bob: For a J2EE deployment, you will have to install the update from the command prompt. There is a great blog entry from one of our engineers who addresses this. Here’s the link for the blog post. Scroll to the solution for the question posed in the entry that goes like this “How to apply the Hotfix in case of ColdFusion deployment to App Server/JEE Server?”

    @Ben: This looks like an issue. Can you please log a bug for this?

    @Shigemii: Yes. You will have to move those jars out. The instructions will be updated to mention that point. Thanks!

    @Rick: Great to hear this! Thanks!

  2. Mac OS X 10.7, CF9.0.1 Developer Edition updated to CHF3 running under Apache; Oracle Java 7 JDK 1.7.0_15 installed (in addition to the stock Apple Java 6 JRE).

    I am unable to convince ACF9 to use the installed Java 7 JRE. I have tried to point ACF at the Java 7 JRE through the CF Administrator UI, by manually editing ../runtime/bin/jvm.config to point to the Java 7 JRE, and by setting and exporting environment variable JAVA_HOME before starting ACF9 from the command-line. In all cases, the “Settings Summary” within the CF Administrator continues to list the Apple Java 6 JRE installed in /System/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/1.6.0.jdk as the JRE in use. If I have the ../runtime/bin/jvm.config specify java.home=/Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.7.0_15/Contents/Home, that path shows on the “Java and JVM” settings page within the CF Administrator but the “Settings Summary” continues to list the Apple Java 6 JRE as what is in use.

    So with all of that, it appears that I am unable to tell ACF9 to use a different JRE. The behavior leads me to believe that the java.home setting in jvm.config is ignored for ACF9 on Mac OS X.

  3. @Ron

    I can confirm the same. I cannot get ACF 9.0.1 with CHF3 on OS X 10.7.5 to start with Oracle Java 1.7.0_15. Stepped through the same things. Also changed JAVA_HOME in {cf_install}/bin/coldfusion to point to Java 7. The {cf_install}/bin/coldfusion is just a wrapper for {cf_install}/runtime/bin/coldfusion9.

    My best guess is that {cf_install}/runtime/bin/coldfusion9 is hardwired to use the Apple installed JVM (probably ALL the executables in that directory are) since there is a string contained inside the executable referencing /System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Versions/A/JavaVM

  4. Where,, and of the respective CHFs updated? The hashes I have for the files from Feb 27 are now different and appear to have been updated on March 1st?

    Seems like CFIDE/scripts/ajax/package/cfmap.js was updated on 02-28-13 19:51.

  5. @David: You are right. But there is no announcement yet about it as we are in process of making another update. This has got to with a few issues that were reported. Stay tuned for any announcement regarding this. At the same time, if anyone goes ahead and applies this CHF, they should be good too.

  6. @Rakshith: You have to be kidding me. I updated a bunch of my development servers with this update last week. And was about to roll it out to my production boxes this week. If I had done this I would be effectively running a different version on development than on production. Furthermore if you have made some silent updates and then continue to make silent updates it becomes quite difficult for me to know what real version of software I am running on any given machine. That a company selling “enterprise” software would make several silent releases like this is the worst kind of build and release management I may have ever seen. I’m truly astonished.

  7. @Scott
    You beat me to it. Software, once released to the public, *especially* if it’s a patch, mustn’t be changed with out updating something somewhere to say it’s a newer version ! You jumped to the conclusion Adobe changed something silently, but more security concious people would think someone else could have changed it…

    So some CF9.0.1 servers will report CHF3 and mean CHF3.0, while some will report CHF3 and mean CHF3.1 ? How on earth are we (and services like HackMyCf) meant to keep track of things ? If you don’t update the release notes (or, better, make a follow up release with a different number) and make a public announcement, how do we make sure we’re even aware there is a ‘bad’ version of the files and we need to reapply the fix ?

    This is not how software costing upwards of £5k should be managed… it feels like you are scrambling around hacking at stuff, tbh, though I know that’s not what is happening it’s the impression we’re seeing…
    If the answer to this is ‘CF10 does it for you’, the same problem applies. If you just update the patch file on the server some servers will have applied it before you changed and some not. No having CF10 compare checksums for every patch ever released every time it checks for updates wont scale either.

    Honestly- package management is a solved problem; more so if you only have a simple ordered list of dependencies like CF updates. How can you guys get this wrong ?

  8. @Scott, @Tom: We are not recommending you to update, that is why you don’t *see* an announcement. We will have new CHFs coming out for CF9 and CF 9.0.1. And you will see an announcement going out with the new CHFs asking you to update. Until then there is no need for you apply the CHF yet again.

  9. @Rakshith
    Thanks for clarifying. It sounds to me like there is no point applying CHF3 to CF9.0.1 right now, because at some point in the near future we’ll have to do it again ? And there is something wrong with CHF3 (well, I know there is, see bug up thread 🙂 ) so applying it to a fresh server isn’t a good plan ?

    Likewise, no point continuing to test the CHF on staging machines because it’ll all have to be redone.

    But if it’s not a recommended update, it shouldn’t be in the files linked to from the recommended CHF download page though – there are other ways for you guys to get files to people who need to try stuff out ahead of a public release !
    You can’t be meaning that anyone running the updated CHF3 files (as opposed to the original CHF3 files) is now running in a non-recomended way ?

  10. @Tom: What I mean to say is that, if you have already applied the CHF, there is no need for you go ahead and update it again because it was modified. If someone has applied the modified update, they are good too.

    I will make a post clarifying regarding the new CHFs that will be released.

  11. @Rakshith
    So what’s the difference between them then ? If we’re ‘good’ with either the first or second CHF3 release, why was it even updated ?

  12. @Rakshith

    What you are saying makes no sense to me. Just based upon the changing of cfmap.js between Feb 27 and March 1 means that if any one applied the CHFs prior to March 1 they will probably get the error noted in Comment #4.

    I still have not heard a response regarding my question in Comment #1 dealing with rollup of hf900-81860 into CHF2 for CF 9.0.0.

    I am also assuming that the update will include fix to Bug ID 3508592, Comment #9

    And finally Java 7 support on OS X absolutely doesn’t work. Nothing I have done has been able to get CF to start with Oracle Java 7 instead of Apple Java 6. Tried a clean install of CF 9.0.2 with CHF 1 as well. same result as CF 9.0.1 w/CHF 3 on OSX 1.7.5. Comments 15 & 16

    So no matter what there are multiple outstanding bugs which would require applying a NEW set of CHFs for appropriate version of CF 9 installed.

  13. @David:
    “Just based upon the changing of cfmap.js between Feb 27 and March 1 means that if any one applied the CHFs prior to March 1 they will probably get the error noted in Comment #4.”
    Yes, that is correct. But there are more issues that have been noticed that were not a part of the CHF. We are fixing all of it with a new CHF.

    I will have one of engineers respond to your question in comment #1.

    We will provide a fix for all the issues reported in the new CHF.

  14. @Rakshith
    I really think you should consider, if you haven’t already, pulling the hot fix… it seems to raise as many new issues as it solves.
    JVM 1.7.x support isn’t critical until someone finds a bug or security problem in 1.6.x that Oracle don’t fix. But then, of course, it’ll become ‘right now’ critical…

  15. @Rakshith

    I and I’m sure most people here very much appreciate your attentiveness and quick answers to the community. Because of this we quickly understand what is going on with this hot fix and have open communication with the product team.

    That said, please do what you can to make sure this “silent update” does not happen again. I would much rather have back to back updates even 3 or 4 in the same couple days than a silently amended update. Additionally I suggest re-evaluating testing procedures before an update goes out. It is so common now that coldfusion updates contain critical issues that I will wait for community feedback before accepting an update.


    ~ Ben

  16. @Rakshith

    So…..all of this being said, is my summary correct in that we are waiting for hotfix 4 for 9.0.1? And this can be applied over hotfix 3 for 9.0.1 (on those development and test servers I have already applied HF 3 to)?

  17. All the technotes ( for CF10, CF9, CF9.0.1 and CF9.0.2) now have an update section to reflect the change that was made. The refreshed CHFs for ColdFusion 9 and the refreshed ColdFusion 10 update 8 contains a fix for the an issue in Google Maps. The technotes for ColdFusion 9 and 9.0.1 also indicate the upcoming CHFs.

  18. @Rakshith

    Just want to make sure I completely understand what has been updated at the top of the technotes regarding ColdFusion 9.0.x, OS X, and Java 7 support. They all have a block that reads similar to:

    “JDK 1.7 is only supported on Mac OS X 10.7 and above. Refer this article for more details. As ColdFusion 9.0.2 does not support Mac OS X 10.7 (refer Support Matrix), Cumulative Hotfix 1 does not certify ColdFusion 9.0.2 with JDK 1.7 on Mac OS X.”

    1) ColdFusion 9.0.x when installed as standalone or multiserver on OS X 10.7 or 10.8, Java 7 will never be supported in that configuration.


    2) At some later point ColdFusion 9.0.x through CHF or other type of update will support Java 7 on OS X 10.7 and 10.8

    If #1 is true, then the only way to have ColdFusion 9.0.x run with Java 7 on OS X is to have it installed as a WAR inside another JEE container/server (Tomcat, JBoss, etc).

  19. You really need to put this info on the ColdFusion downloads/updates page, as it still is not there.
    Many people rely on that page, and have been hacked due to the updates not being listed there, not everyone reads this blog.

  20. @Danny I can’t recommend HackMyCf enough. Even on CF10, where the auto update mechanism sometimes breaks, it’s important to have this as a backup.

  21. What’s the secret on MacOS 10.8.3 to actually get it to run with 1.7 then? I’ve got java -version reporting as 1.7, I’d edited the shell file coldfusion9 to have the 1.7 JDK paths, the CurrentJDK symlink is updated but CF refuses to run with 1.7. Any clues?

  22. @Ian: see comments 14, 16, 27, 40, and probably most importantly 41, above. A couple of us pointed out that it just doesn’t work. Rakshith from Adobe noted that CF9 is not considered to be supported on OSX 10.7 or 10.8, which is another way of saying they aren’t going to fix it.

  23. Running CF10 Enterprise with the latest update 8 and upgrading to JDK 7 leaves serious problems with XML objects and XMLSearch. Users of frameworks like Coldspring, Model-Glue and Transfer should be very wary of upgrading their applications.

    I was experiencing crazy, crazy issues where valid nodes in a persistent-scope XML object would suddenly no longer be found.

    Downgrading to 1.6 u43 has resolved those issues for me. Because the issue was sporadic (but happened regularly), I was not able to create a simple test case. But, downgrading has eliminated all of the errors for me.

    Here’s some notes from my thread:!topic/transfer-dev/82Nx3lbNEyE

  24. hi, I was in a impression that CF comes packaged with its own JRE and each instance has its own copy of that JRE. So even if the JRE is installed on the system CF probably won’t use it, please let me knwo if am correct or we definately need to install the JRE/JDk on the server.

  25. @Raja
    Yes, it does, but it’s very (very) out of date – you will need to change a setting in the CFIDE to use a more up to date “external” one from the O/S.

    Maybe a read of the server lock down guide is in order ?

Leave a reply