Hello, The KDE maintainer in Fedora started an interesting discussion some time ago in Digikam's mailing list. There was input from the very IJG:
http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/2013-January/066206.html It boils down to "jpeg6-2 is the only important thing. Forget about jpeg8 and jpeg9, which bring incompatible changes". http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/digikam-devel/2013-January/066256.html FWIW, Arch and Gentoo also follow the policy that jpeg6-2 (and jpeg-turbo with 6-2 API/ABI) is the real deal. On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Mike Gabriel < mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de> wrote: > Hi Ondřej, > > I have just uploaded libjpeg-turbo to Debian and it still hovers in NEW > [1]. > > On Mi 24 Apr 2013 11:23:04 CEST Ondřej Surý wrote: > > Debian has already open ITP[3] #602034 for libjpeg-turbo, which >> support libjpeg62 API/ABI and also some important bits of libjpeg8. As >> libjpeg is one of the base libraries of the system, I think it might >> be a good idea to discuss this project wide. Also although I have an >> opinion (as you might have guessed from this email) that we should try >> to be aligned with other distributions and the reasoning for not going >> for , I will be happy with whatever result will end-up. >> > > In an IRC discussion in #debian-devel several weeks ago the consensus was: > the RT team (represented Julien) will probably not want two libjpeg > implementations in Debian. My first packaging approach aimed at having the > compat mode libraries available [2] and allow the user to install them as a > drop-in replacement for libjpeg8. > > The IRC discussion lead to the result that the compat packages are not > wanted in Debian, only the native TURBOjpeg ABI. I was asked to ping Bill > Allombert about his opinion to transition from libjpeg8 fully to > libjpeg8-turbo. @Bill: can you repeat your disposition here again? I guess > our earlier mailing was a private mail exchange. > > A. Add libjpeg-turbo to Debian archive (that's easy) >> > > Done. Waiting in NEW. Only containing libturbojpeg.so.1 > > B. Add required provides/alternatives for libjpeg62-dev and >> libjpeg8-dev (where API/ABI match) >> > > A packaging example can be seen in [1]. If the packages disappears from > the NEW queue, you can also obtain a libjpeg-turbo version with compat > packages provided here [3]. > > C. Decide which package should provide default libjpeg-dev library >> > > Last statement from Bill: libjpeg by IJG > > Greets, > Mike > > > [1] > http://ftp-master.debian.org/**new/libjpeg-turbo_1.2.90-2.**html<http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/libjpeg-turbo_1.2.90-2.html> > [2] > http://ftp-master.debian.org/**new/libjpeg-turbo_1.2.90-1.**html<http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/libjpeg-turbo_1.2.90-1.html> > [3] > http://packages.x2go.org/**debian/pool/main/libj/libjpeg-**turbo/<http://packages.x2go.org/debian/pool/main/libj/libjpeg-turbo/> > > -- > > DAS-NETZWERKTEAM > mike gabriel, rothenstein 5, 24214 neudorf-bornstein > fon: +49 (1520) 1976 148 > > GnuPG Key ID 0x25771B31 > mail: mike.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.**de<mike.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de>, > http://das-netzwerkteam.de > > freeBusy: > https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.**de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-** > netzwerkteam.de.xfb<https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xfb> -- Pau Garcia i Quiles http://www.elpauer.org (Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)
