> 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@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Imagine a large red swirl here. > -- in your fear, speak only peace in your fear, seek only love -d. bowie -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
