Hi Thomas!
I've just released jigit v1.22 with the embedded libjte 2.0.0. Here's
a (hopefully complete!) diff of the extra changes I've made on top of
xorriso 1.5.2, beyond simply copying in the libjte directory from my
new release. I've tested this for generating both jigdo formats and
all looks
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Let's go with "-jigdo-checksum-algorithm" to keep the separation?
The user is king.
Other mail:
I proposed to keep versioning and SONAME at 1
> > LIBJTE1 {
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> Surely that works for upwards compatibility, but won't stop somebody
> from building
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:04:31AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>SONAME comes from libjte/configure.ac. Dunno from where libburn got the
>slightly braindamaged way to compose it. From there it spread over the
>other libraries. libjte is its youngest victim. Shrug.
Right.
>The upstream
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:37:29PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>while exploring the need for adaptions in the build system of libsofs,
>i wonder whether it is really necessary to create LIBJTE2 in libjte.ver.
>Adding new functions is upward compatible.
>In my libraries i add them to the
[ Arg, sorry to keep you waiting for responses. Really busy
week... :-/ ]
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 10:10:04PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>i wrote:
>> > libjte_set_checksum_algorithm() became necessary
>
>Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> ACK. I'd not thought that through fully myself here, but
Hi,
SONAME comes from libjte/configure.ac. Dunno from where libburn got the
slightly braindamaged way to compose it. From there it spread over the
other libraries. libjte is its youngest victim. Shrug.
The upstream revision "2.0.0" is not necessarily the .so suffix.
The macro values from
Hi,
while exploring the need for adaptions in the build system of libsofs,
i wonder whether it is really necessary to create LIBJTE2 in libjte.ver.
Adding new functions is upward compatible.
In my libraries i add them to the current (and only) SONAME version.
Fine check for compatibility happens
Hi,
i wrote:
> > libjte_set_checksum_algorithm() became necessary
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> ACK. I'd not thought that through fully myself here, but yes.
Here you see why it is good to have a mutually curious user-developer
relation. :))
> I'm open to changing things like option names here,
Arg, and our mails have just crossed I see! :-)
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 07:24:16PM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>after finding
>
> https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=jigit.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/sha256
>
>
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 09:15:34AM +0100, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> the external API for libjte is *very* close to what we had before.
>
>Now i'm curious. I expected no need for a change, assumed that you'd
>automagically detect the checksum type from the lines in the
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:30:09PM +0100, Richard Atterer wrote:
>Hi Steve,
>
>thank you very much for continuing to take care of jigdo! It's been a loong
>time since I actively worked on it. (Must have been ~2000 that I started
>creating it.)
>
>I've updated my site to point to the URL you gave
Hi,
after finding
https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=jigit.git;a=log;h=refs/heads/sha256
https://git.einval.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=jigit.git;a=blob;f=libjte/libjte.h;hb=refs/heads/sha256
i now believe to understand that the new API call
int libjte_set_checksum_algorithm(struct
Hi,
Steve McIntyre wrote:
> the external API for libjte is *very* close to what we had before.
Now i'm curious. I expected no need for a change, assumed that you'd
automagically detect the checksum type from the lines in the -md5-list
file.
> I've got a simple diff right now that I'm
> just
Hi Steve,
thank you very much for continuing to take care of jigdo! It's been a loong
time since I actively worked on it. (Must have been ~2000 that I started
creating it.)
I've updated my site to point to the URL you gave - does the text I used
work for you?
I think given that I don't work
14 matches
Mail list logo
