FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-25-2008, 03:34 PM
"Mathieu Malaterre"
 
Default LJPEG 62.1 release ! (was r2712 - trunk/packages/gdcm/trunk/debian (jpeg))

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Mathieu Malaterre
<mathieu.malaterre@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>>
>>> Well the size of the lib will change. I think the API is compatible,
>>> but I do not know about the ABI. I really do not feel comfortable with
>>> option 1.
>>
>> OK - I just trust you because I never dived into this.
>>
>>> I'll start anyway with option 2, in the end there need to be such a
>>> package. It is so completely different from the libjpeg62, that I am
>>> now convinced this is not a bug against libjpeg62.
>>
>> Fine. So we have sorted out the way to go: Build a separate libjpeg62+
>> (or whatever name seems to be apropriate - I would not attach the name
>> gdcm to this one) which can be used to link gdcm against.
>>
>>> ijg 6b was release in 98. no one really complain about that. At one
>>> point, when I had much more free time on my hand I found out that
>>> imagemagick people are supporting both lib (the official lib and the
>>> patched one). and of course the only other people using it are the
>>> dcmtk people.
>>
>> Could anybody verify how the Debian packaged version of imagemagick
>> and dcmtk are dealing with this issue. Does it might be that these
>> both ship their own version of lossless JPEG compression algorithm -
>> which would make even more sense to create the additional package.
>> What about graphicsmagick?
>>
>>> Anyway this is a no-op to create such package (option #2). I even
>>> maintain the jpeg.sf.net for that particular point. I'll be away for a
>>> couple of days, do you have some sort of bug tracker to keep track of
>>> this sort of thing ?
>>
>> I'm afraid I do not understand this parapgraph. Above you seem to
>> agree that building a separate package and now you call it a no-op?
>> And what do you mean with a bug tracker. If you intent to create a
>> new package you can use the Debian BTS and file an ITP bug against
>> the WNPP pseudo package.
>
>
> Done.
>
> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=143299&package_id=300399&re lease_id=642896
>
> This package contains:
> * IJG 6b
> * Lossless patch (oceana)
> * cmakelists.txt
> * debian/* files
>
> For people starting from this thread, LJPEG is simply an integration
> of the lossless patch for IJG. It comes with cmakelists.txt as a
> default build system since the building of IJG to support 8 / 12 and
> 16 bits is not a runtime option but a compile time option. I feel much
> more comfortable writing that in cmake than with the previous build
> system.
>
> Let see if the community has any interest in this package. There are a
> couple of gray areas remaining:
>
> - should I keep the version number 62 (aka 6b) from IJG or will this
> confuse people ?
> - I have a couple of patch in the gdcm/jpeg that have not been
> applied. It concern broken JPEG implementation and have not been seen
> outside of the DICOM world.
> - if this package ever gets into debian, I think dcmtk package should
> use it instead.

I forgot to mention, the debian/* files are not shipped with the
tarball and can be found instead at:

http://jpeg.svn.sf.net/viewvc/jpeg/ljpeg/debian/

Thanks
--
Mathieu


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 11-25-2008, 08:14 PM
Andreas Tille
 
Default LJPEG 62.1 release ! (was r2712 - trunk/packages/gdcm/trunk/debian (jpeg))

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:


Let see if the community has any interest in this package. There are a
couple of gray areas remaining:

- should I keep the version number 62 (aka 6b) from IJG or will this
confuse people ?


The version number should be different from the other libjpeg inside
Debian.


- I have a couple of patch in the gdcm/jpeg that have not been
applied. It concern broken JPEG implementation and have not been seen
outside of the DICOM world.


I have no idea in how far these patches make sense for general use outside
Debian - than they should be included into the tarball (under a new version,
because it is just a new upstream version). If they only are useful for
specific Debian package they should be applied using quilt or dpatch.


- if this package ever gets into debian, I think dcmtk package should
use it instead.


Probably.


I forgot to mention, the debian/* files are not shipped with the
tarball and can be found instead at:

http://jpeg.svn.sf.net/viewvc/jpeg/ljpeg/debian/


This is really great. I think I just elaborated about debian files in
upstream tarball - thanks for this sane decision.

Any volunteers to build an official Debian package from it to proceed
with the dicom issues?

Kind regards and thanks for your fine work

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 11-26-2008, 04:44 PM
"Mathieu Malaterre"
 
Default LJPEG 62.1 release ! (was r2712 - trunk/packages/gdcm/trunk/debian (jpeg))

Andreas,

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Andreas Tille <tillea@rki.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>
>>> Let see if the community has any interest in this package. There are a
>>> couple of gray areas remaining:
>>>
>>> - should I keep the version number 62 (aka 6b) from IJG or will this
>>> confuse people ?
>
> The version number should be different from the other libjpeg inside
> Debian.

Just to double check you understand that I call the package "libljpeg"
so that it does not conflict with "libjpeg". The reason I kep the 62
notation is so that people are aware the patch was applied against the
official ijg release 62, and not the one from guido's 6c release.

>>> - I have a couple of patch in the gdcm/jpeg that have not been
>>> applied. It concern broken JPEG implementation and have not been seen
>>> outside of the DICOM world.
>
> I have no idea in how far these patches make sense for general use outside
> Debian - than they should be included into the tarball (under a new version,
> because it is just a new upstream version). If they only are useful for
> specific Debian package they should be applied using quilt or dpatch.

So far the package is very minimalist and only contains :
- ijg 6b
- lossless patch
- cmakelists

it does not contains non of the gdcm's patch. I'll work on that; once
I see positive response from a DD to handle the package. This
duplicate my work from the gdcm package, so I'd prefer not waste my
time for a doomed package.

>> I forgot to mention, the debian/* files are not shipped with the
>> tarball and can be found instead at:
>>
>> http://jpeg.svn.sf.net/viewvc/jpeg/ljpeg/debian/
>
> This is really great. I think I just elaborated about debian files in
> upstream tarball - thanks for this sane decision.
>
> Any volunteers to build an official Debian package from it to proceed
> with the dicom issues?
>
> Kind regards and thanks for your fine work

As a side note what does it takes to becomes a DD ? I guess there
should be some info on the web, I'll check on that.


Regards,
--
Mathieu


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:46 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org