Em 17-10-2013 12:48, Bruce Dubbs escreveu: > Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> Em 17-10-2013 11:40, alex lupu escreveu: >>> Hi Bruce, >>> >>>>> ... >>>>> 921939 2012-03-27 12:51 libjpeg.so.8.4.0 >>>>> 425541 2013-09-30 12:05 libjpeg.so.8.0.2 >>>>> 16 2013-09-30 12:05 libjpeg.so.8 -> libjpeg.so.8.4.0 >>>>> 16 2013-09-30 12:05 libjpeg.so -> libjpeg.so.8.0.2 >>> >>>> ... >>>> Note that only libjpeg.so -> libjpeg.so.8.0.2 is used for new builds and >>>> libjpeg.so.8 points to libjpeg.so.8.4.0. I think there is a potential >>>> problem there. >>> >>> Was this problem caused by me (by mistake, obviously) or is this the way >>> libjpeg installs these days? > >> I believe your problem is related to: >> >> <http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/3765> >> >> <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg16492.html> >> >> I wanted a small sentence in libjpeg-turbo added to warn users, but the >> ticket was closed as invalid. > > Fernando, I see both sides of the issue. If you want to add a note in > the libjpeg-turbo page, go ahead.
Thanks, Bruce, Actually, when it was closed, I was agreeing to close it, but because it was "overcomebyevents". It is too long since the issue. Today, even a small sentence such as "If jpeg-8d is installed, remove it, before installing libjpeg-turbo" seems not so relevant, I am not sure anymore if it would be useful, or just reply to support? -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
