On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 02:19:39PM +0200, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 03:30:40PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > > My plan is to move to libjpeg8. libjpeg62 is a technological dead-end. > > libjpeg8 support a larger part of the JPEG standard than libjpeg62. > > When images that make advantage of that start to be widespread, users > > will need libjpeg8 support. > > from what I have heard, libjpeg8 doesn't not support "larger part of JPEG > standard" but rather a "new proposal for Version 8.0" of JPEG specification: > > http://hardwarebug.org/2010/02/01/ijg-swings-again-and-misses/
This article miss the point entirely by assuming that "JPEG is only used for the final published version" and does not mention other changes that lead to support larger part of the JPEG standard. It also totally ignore image quality improvement. > personally, I feel really uncomfortable that out of blue new, incompatible > jpeg format has been introduced. Even if debian starts supporting these > features, there is huge amount of older installations and even hardware > that only supports the "old" jpeg features. Debian not supporting theses features is not a better option. > > > fedora moved to libjpeg-turbo, is there some convincing reason > > > to go with abi-incompatible new libjpeg version instead? > > > My understanding is that Fedora plan to move to the libjpeg8 ABI. > > Do you have some source for this understanding? All I know they still > use libjpeg-turbo for F15: > > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=libjpeg-turbo.git My understanding is that RedHat sponsored support of libjpeg8 ABI to libjpeg-turbo, so they probably plan to use it. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
