[lsb-discuss] libjpeg API issues

Dan Harrison nixscripter at gmail.com
Thu Apr 25 16:05:53 UTC 2013


I just saw the last call minutes. That API split looks bad. But I have a
rather naiive question: why not make the standard require both libraries be
present?

That is what seems to happen in practice on my machines, including back
when I had LSB compliant OSes: applications installed one or the other,
depending on  what features they wanted (to say nothing of JPEG2000).
Before long, they were both on the machine, happily coexisting. It seems
developers have been using non-overlapping features for a while.

So is it possible to put both in the standard? The "LSB backward
compatible" version 8 would be libjpeg-turbo, and the new version 9 would
be OpenJPEG, and perhaps there would be an SO name trick or two to help the
drop-in-replacement part (ln -s /usr/lib{32,64}/libjpeg.so.8.0.2
/usr/bin/libopenjpeg.so.1.5.0).

After having used Ubuntu, OpenSUSE, and CentOS, I don't know of any distro
that doesn't let you install both. Isn't it easier to get the distros to
add one small symlink to their packages, instead of the upstream developers
to change their philosophical reasoning for diverging? Or would there be
ABI issues I can't see in the part libjpeg-turbo would be trying to replace?

--
Dan Harrison
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/attachments/20130425/e11e4ba3/attachment.html>


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list