On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Mathieu Malaterre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: >> >>> Well the size of the lib will change. I think the API is compatible, >>> but I do not know about the ABI. I really do not feel comfortable with >>> option 1. >> >> OK - I just trust you because I never dived into this. >> >>> I'll start anyway with option 2, in the end there need to be such a >>> package. It is so completely different from the libjpeg62, that I am >>> now convinced this is not a bug against libjpeg62. >> >> Fine. So we have sorted out the way to go: Build a separate libjpeg62+ >> (or whatever name seems to be apropriate - I would not attach the name >> gdcm to this one) which can be used to link gdcm against. >> >>> ijg 6b was release in 98. no one really complain about that. At one >>> point, when I had much more free time on my hand I found out that >>> imagemagick people are supporting both lib (the official lib and the >>> patched one). and of course the only other people using it are the >>> dcmtk people. >> >> Could anybody verify how the Debian packaged version of imagemagick >> and dcmtk are dealing with this issue. Does it might be that these >> both ship their own version of lossless JPEG compression algorithm - >> which would make even more sense to create the additional package. >> What about graphicsmagick? >> >>> Anyway this is a no-op to create such package (option #2). I even >>> maintain the jpeg.sf.net for that particular point. I'll be away for a >>> couple of days, do you have some sort of bug tracker to keep track of >>> this sort of thing ? >> >> I'm afraid I do not understand this parapgraph. Above you seem to >> agree that building a separate package and now you call it a no-op? >> And what do you mean with a bug tracker. If you intent to create a >> new package you can use the Debian BTS and file an ITP bug against >> the WNPP pseudo package. > > > Done. > > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=143299&package_id=300399&release_id=642896 > > This package contains: > * IJG 6b > * Lossless patch (oceana) > * cmakelists.txt > * debian/* files > > For people starting from this thread, LJPEG is simply an integration > of the lossless patch for IJG. It comes with cmakelists.txt as a > default build system since the building of IJG to support 8 / 12 and > 16 bits is not a runtime option but a compile time option. I feel much > more comfortable writing that in cmake than with the previous build > system. > > Let see if the community has any interest in this package. There are a > couple of gray areas remaining: > > - should I keep the version number 62 (aka 6b) from IJG or will this > confuse people ? > - I have a couple of patch in the gdcm/jpeg that have not been > applied. It concern broken JPEG implementation and have not been seen > outside of the DICOM world. > - if this package ever gets into debian, I think dcmtk package should > use it instead.
I forgot to mention, the debian/* files are not shipped with the tarball and can be found instead at: http://jpeg.svn.sf.net/viewvc/jpeg/ljpeg/debian/ Thanks -- Mathieu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]