On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 01:21:16PM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> access to the project there? I have a SF account currently.
>
> As far as bringing libjpeg current, I'm not sure the task would be as
> herculean as it sounds, activities at fd.o hotwithstanding, not sure
> what
> that's about.
>
> State of things as I see them:
>
> 1 libjpeg bug in RH/Fedora land.
>
> 1 libjpeg bug in Debian. CCing debian libjpeg62 maintainer.
Which bug you are pointing to ?
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=446821
> None in Gentoo. Not sure where OpenSUSE bugs live. Not sure
what other
> distros to loop into this.
>
> What it looks like needs to be done is an examination of the patches
> used
> in the above distros, and a discussion over these among the distro
> maintainers and $_libjpeg_upstream_designee, leading to integration of
> those most commonly used in the distros.
>
> Does this sound sane?
The most important thing is that everybody standardize on the same
API and ABI for the successor of libjpeg6b. This means not only the same
source tarball, but also the same set of optionnal features activated
for /usr/lib/libjpeg.so in all distros.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe(a)debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie