[Bug 1922638] Review Request: jpegxl - JPEG XL image format reference implementation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922638

Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 <zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends On|                            |1962319 (sjpeg)



--- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 <zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #9)
> (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #8)
> > (In reply to Antonio T. sagitter from comment #7)
> > > Issues:
> > > =======
> > > - Package installs properly.
> > >   Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
> > >   See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
> > >   
> > >   Problem: conflicting requests
> > >   - nothing provides libsjpeg.so.0.1()(64bit) needed by
> > > jpegxl-utils-0.3.7-1.fc35.x86_64
> > >
> > 
> > I have two solutions possible for this: build the binaries with static
> > libraries included in them or unbundle sjpeg and make it a separate package.
> > What do you think is the best option? I had already made a sjpeg package for
> > testing but I haven't submitted it yet for review.
> > 
> >    
> 
> You're already compiling libsjpeg dynamic libraries, you may install them in
> a private lib directory of jpegxl-libs.
> 

I don't see this as a good option, because if someone else needs sjpeg, they
won,t be able to package it or provide it along their package without conflict.

> Separating sjpeg as new package is another solution, sure, but in my opinion
> you should be sure that the 'sjpeg' code bundled is in truth constantly
> upgraded/modified for jpegxl's needs; latest 'sjpeg' code bundled is from a
> commit of 12h March 2019 (why?). I would ask to upstream.
> 

Sjpeg is not linked to jpeg-xl, they're independently developed. I don,t expect
breakage, considering the active developement of jpeg-xl, it would be fixed
pretty quickly I believe.

> Fron sjpeg side, the code has been recently modified but never stable
> released. Is it ready for "living" alone? :)

I think so.



Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1962319
[Bug 1962319] Review Request: sjpeg - SimpleJPEG: simple jpeg
encoderSimpleJPEG: simple jpeg encoder
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux