Hi all, > On Fri, Jun 01, 2012 at 11:57:54PM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:50:19PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote: > > ... > > > you may want to have a very little bit more history... (and a > > > packaging folder) > > > http://code.x2go.org/gitweb?p=libjpeg-turbo.git;a=summary > > > > This is one of them. Ubuntu package history is another one. > > > > > We would have to import latest upstream on top of that > > > > Well, unless we all agree to reset git repo, this is impossible to do. > > I like to do it.... > > > > > but the packaging works fine for libjpeg8 emulation mode. > > > > Sure, what I commited is something like this plus new upstream. > > It should work fine for libjpeg8 emulation mode. > > > > > However, I really think that we should put the dpkg-divert stuff > > > into an extra bin:package (in the same libjpeg-turbo src:package, of > > > course). > > It is not reasonnable for libjpeg-turbo to dpkg-divert libjpeg8, > since it does not provide the same features set and break libjpeg-progs > at least. (there is a lot of features that are missing in libjpeg-turbo > and some file created by libjpeg8 cannot be rendered correctly by > libjpeg-turbo).
As said before, I agree with bill that the diversion stuff has to stay out of the base LJT package. However, I would like to give people in wheezy the chance to drop in replace LJ by LJT with installation of an extra package that handles the versions. This package I would not even mention in Suggests:... The drop-in replacement has to be reversible with uninstallation for the diversion package. People have to remove the diversions without removing LJT. Our (and LJT upstream's) gain then is that we have a package/forum in BTS where all the incompatibility reports can be assigned to. This is usefull for further discussions. If people urge on replacing LJ by LJT somepost-wheezy-time later, then we can say: hey, take a look at all those bugs filed against the LJT diversion package... Or maybe there won't be many bugs being reported. Who knows. > Instead the set of application that need libjpeg-turbo could use > LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc. (put libjpeg-turbo in > /usr/lib/libjpeg-turbo/libjpeg8 and do > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/libjpeg-turbo/libjpeg8:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH in a > wrapper script) As the native LJT library names do not interfere with Libjpeg8 lib so names, the LD_LIB_NAME thing is not even necessary, I think. Only the file/link names in the LJT diversion package will raise the naming interference (which is wanted with that package) Greets Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org