Re: [RFC] Use libjpeg-turbo in place of libjpeg

[Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@topic.nl>]

On 27-11-15 12:19, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 09:13:22AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Maxin B. John <maxin.john@intel.com> wrote:
>>> This patch set provides libjpeg-turbo as a drop-in replacement for libjpeg.
>>>
>>> libjpeg-turbo is a fork of the original libjpeg project.Most of the major Linux
>>> distros (Fedora, Debian, OpenSUSE) moved from libjpeg to libjpeg-turbo recently.
>>> lbjpeg-turbo provides better JPEG compression/decompression(at least 25% faster)
>>> while maintaining same API/ABI as libjpeg.
>>>
>>> Once we reach an agreement on this, based on the decision, we can move the
>>> libjpeg package to meta-oe for applications which may depend on API version 9.
>>
>> I support this change, due:
>>
>>   - agreement with major Linux distros
>>   - performance improvement
>>
>> I also think moving libjpeg (API version 9) for meta-oe is fine as
>> well. I am not aware of any application which requires it, though.
>
> I'm not aware of any as well, so I would prefer to drop libjpeg
> completely.
>
> + less junk in meta-oe
> + people were confused about multiple jpeg providers before, now they
> would be again, but without good reason (as nobody knows about apps
> depending on libjpeg9).

Indeed, most (read: "I") have set the PREFERRED_SUPPLIER to "jpeg" just to get 
rid of the warning message, and not really bothering to check what either meant.

I'm in favor of dropping libjpeg completely, it's just confusing.

Moving it will lead to package dependency problems when upgrading from one to 
the other.



Kind regards,

Mike Looijmans
System Expert

TOPIC Embedded Products
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: mike.looijmans@topicproducts.com
Website: www.topicproducts.com

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail