Hi all,
On Sa 02 Jun 2012 20:53:10 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > 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
+1 from me. However, as Fathi is ITP holder, he may have the last word.
I know
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 10:51:13AM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Osamu, hi all,
>
> On Sa 02 Jun 2012 20:53:10 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 06:58:51AM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> >>Hi Osamu,
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:50:19PM +0200,
Hi Osamu, hi all,
On Sa 02 Jun 2012 20:53:10 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 06:58:51AM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
Hi Osamu,
> 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
> >
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 02, 2012 at 06:58:51AM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Osamu,
>
> > 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=li
Hi Osamu,
> 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 anoth
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
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
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
Hi,
On Do 31 Mai 2012 15:55:28 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 07:36:12PM +0300, Fathi Boudra wrote:
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> >Also, Mike Gabriel's work seems to have done somethings interesting on
>> >old Fathi's version and made many improvem
Hi,
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 07:36:12PM +0300, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> >> >Also, Mike Gabriel's work seems to have done somethings interesting on
> >> >old Fathi's version and made many improvements.
> >>
> >> thanks for pinging us! I agree, libjp
Hi,
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:20:21PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mi 30 Mai 2012 11:21:18 CEST Bill Allombert wrote:
...
Let's focus on topic: ITP = Intent_To_Package for libjpeg-turbo
> >Whether a package is correctly licensed is certainly relevant to an ITP.
> >libjpeg-turbo is
Hi,
On Mi 30 Mai 2012 11:21:18 CEST Bill Allombert wrote:
I fully agree with Fathi, no political discussion via an Debian ITP in BTS.
Guido and me have been dragged in this bug log against our will. You
can hardly
blame us for answering.
Not blaming anyone...
Whether a package is corre
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:09:12AM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi Fathi,
>
> On Mi 30 Mai 2012 06:06:07 CEST Fathi Boudra wrote:
>
> >On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Guido Vollbeding wrote:
> >>Hello Mathieu
> >>
> >>Thank you for question.
> >>libjpeg is reference code, not faulty patchwork.
Hello Mathieu
I fully agree with Fathi, no political discussion via an Debian ITP in BTS.
Well the issues were about:
1. legal issues
2. ABI compatibility
You are right, these are more substantial than just "political" issues.
(1) If any part of the source code for this software is distrib
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:58:40AM +0300, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Bill Allombert
> wrote:
> > I am surprised you do not count Debian as a major distro.
> > Does libjpeg-progs works correctly with LJT ?
>
> That's my point. Debian is the only one that haven't switch
Hi all,
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Mike Gabriel
wrote:
> Hi Fathi,
>
>
> On Mi 30 Mai 2012 06:06:07 CEST Fathi Boudra wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Guido Vollbeding
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Mathieu
>>>
>>> Thank you for question.
>>> libjpeg is reference code, not faulty pat
Hi Fathi,
On Mi 30 Mai 2012 06:06:07 CEST Fathi Boudra wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Guido Vollbeding wrote:
Hello Mathieu
Thank you for question.
libjpeg is reference code, not faulty patchwork.
Everything is said in the README:
There are currently distributions in circulation c
For information, it looks like not all of libjpeg8 is actually
implemented in libjpeg-turbo, ref:
http://libjpeg-turbo.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/libjpeg-turbo/trunk/README-turbo.txt
In particular:
libjpeg v7 and v8 Features:
---
Fully supported:
-- cjpeg: Separate quali
Dear Fathi Boudra
What they agree or not agree is not relevant, but the facts are relevant!
To give you a few real examples:
You won't be able to access the following image with your browsers,
because they use obsolete and illegal derivations of libjpeg:
http://filmicgames.com/Images/Patents
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:15 AM, Guido Vollbeding wrote:
> Hello Mathieu
>
> Thank you for question.
> libjpeg is reference code, not faulty patchwork.
> Everything is said in the README:
>
> There are currently distributions in circulation containing the name
> "libjpeg" which claim to be a "de
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Bill Allombert
wrote:
> I am surprised you do not count Debian as a major distro.
> Does libjpeg-progs works correctly with LJT ?
That's my point. Debian is the only one that haven't switched yet :)
Yes, LJT works with libjpeg-progs.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email
Hello Mathieu
Thank you for question.
libjpeg is reference code, not faulty patchwork.
Everything is said in the README:
There are currently distributions in circulation containing the name
"libjpeg" which claim to be a "derivative" or "fork" of the original
libjpeg, but don't have the fea
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 07:27:35PM +0300, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> Hi Bill,
>
> On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Does libjpeg-turbo8 implement the full v8 API ? As far as I understand some
> > functions
> > are stub.
>
> I'm not sure it's relevant anymore. All major distro
Guido,
Sorry to make you jump in the middle of this thread. We are
discussing compatibilities issues in between LJT (lib JPEG Turbo) and
the official IJG distribution. The whole thread can be seen here:
http://bugs.debian.org/612341
Do you have any particular comments on LJT ? From a pure de
Hi Fathi,
On Di 29 Mai 2012 18:36:12 CEST Fathi Boudra wrote:
Sounds like many people are interested. LJT is a good candidate for
collab-maint on git.debian.org :)
Good idea. Please relocate the packaging Git so that we can work
together on this.
Greets,
Mike
--
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
mike g
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> >Also, Mike Gabriel's work seems to have done somethings interesting on
>> >old Fathi's version and made many improvements.
>>
>> thanks for pinging us! I agree, libjpeg-turbo has to be in Wheezy!!!
>>
>> Fathi, please send us a notice what you
Hi Bill,
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:40 PM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> Does libjpeg-turbo8 implement the full v8 API ? As far as I understand some
> functions
> are stub.
I'm not sure it's relevant anymore. All major distro have switched to LJT.
Ubuntu is using it by default and no issues were found
Hi,
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 10:43:39AM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> Hi there,
...
> > CCed: Bill who is libjpeg maintainer.
>
> As far as I know libjpeg is not really concerned here. virtualgl only
> links to libturbojpeg. So there really are two issues in a single
> report:
> 1. optimized j
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 03:34:39AM +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 06:31:46PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > On Sa 26 Mai 2012 17:11:02 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
> >
> > >This ITP Bug #612341 was supposed to be closed by Fathi sometime early
> > >January.
Hi there,
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 06:31:46PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Sa 26 Mai 2012 17:11:02 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
>>
>> >This ITP Bug #612341 was supposed to be closed by Fathi sometime early
>> >January. Nothi
Hi,
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 06:31:46PM +0200, Mike Gabriel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Sa 26 Mai 2012 17:11:02 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
>
> >This ITP Bug #612341 was supposed to be closed by Fathi sometime early
> >January. Nothing happened. http://bugs.debian.org/612341
> >
> >In the meantime, Ubun
Hi all,
On Sa 26 Mai 2012 17:11:02 CEST Osamu Aoki wrote:
This ITP Bug #612341 was supposed to be closed by Fathi sometime early
January. Nothing happened. http://bugs.debian.org/612341
In the meantime, Ubuntu package was updated to generate -dev etc.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/li
Hi,
This ITP Bug #612341 was supposed to be closed by Fathi sometime early
January. Nothing happened. http://bugs.debian.org/612341
In the meantime, Ubuntu package was updated to generate -dev etc.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libjpeg-turbo
libjpeg-turbo (1.1.90+svn733-0ubuntu4) preci
33 matches
Mail list logo