http://imagej.273.s1.nabble.com/Re-fiji-update-issues-on-winxp64-tp5008161p5008163.html
> Hi Aryeh,
>
> On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Aryeh Weiss wrote:
>
> > I apologize for not reporting this withthe bug submission mechanism, but
> > I could not do that from the machine in question since the bug is that
> > Fiji did not run.
>
> No problem. We try to accomodate by whatever means a bug is reported
> (within reason, of course, do not try to ring my bell at 4am to tell me in
> person!). I Cc:ed the list because this issue might hit other people, too.
>
> > Anyway, this time I only took update sites that I needed, but after
> > upgrading today FIji would not launch. I used the --console option to
> > generate the attached log, which I hope will be helpful to you.
>
> It is. It showed that there is serious version skew going on: quite a
> couple of files are present whose versions do not fit with each other,
> some of the libraries are even present in multiple versions.
>
> I am afraid that it will be a little involved to fix this setup, but
> doable. The first order of business is to get your Fiji to start again.
> The easiest method would actually be to start it in pure ImageJ 1.x mode
> [*1*]:
>
> ImageJ-win64.exe --ij1
>
> After that, you should see Help>Update Fiji and that *should* be able to
> bring you to a usable state, by falling back to the current updater. If
> that is not the case, please feel free to delete all versions of
> jars/fiji-updater.jar and try again.
>
> If that still does not work, please do not hesitate to direct your web
> browser to
http://fiji.sc/IRC; this way you can enter a chat room in which
> I am usually present when working (unless I really need to concentrate,
> but then there are other people in that chat room, too). I will assist you
> in real time with fixing the setup.
>
> Ciao,
> Johannes
>
> Footnote *1*: We do have a couple of ideas how to make the startup of
> Fiji/ImageJ2 more robust when there is version skew. For the moment, we
> cannot prusue those ideas, however, because there is still too much else
> to do. If you are interested in the progress of making the startup more
> robust, let's make a ticket on GitHub that you can follow.
>