[gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Samuli Suominen]

media-libs/jpeg-7 installs .so.7.0.0 so this causes some headacke for
binary applications:

media-libs/jpeg-compat-6b will install libjpeg.so.62{,.0.0} for use with
binary applications, let me know if there is a trouble with the package.

This means you have change deps to || ( media-libs/jpeg-compat
<=media-libs/jpeg-7 ) for example. Feel free to use suitable alternative
syntaxes.

Otherwise it just means a long @preserved-rebuild emerge.

jpegint.h isn't installed anymore (private header), if this is causing
trouble for you let me know about that too...

Thanks, Samuli

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Samuli Suominen]

Samuli Suominen wrote:
> This means you have change deps to || ( media-libs/jpeg-compat
> <=media-libs/jpeg-7 ) for example. Feel free to use suitable alternative
> syntaxes.

Typo. Correct:

|| ( media-libs/jpeg-compat <media-libs/jpeg-7 )

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 245 bytes --]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:01:47 +0300
Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:
> media-libs/jpeg-7 installs .so.7.0.0 so this causes some headacke for
> binary applications:

Doesn't this mean you should slot it?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Samuli Suominen]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:01:47 +0300
> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> media-libs/jpeg-7 installs .so.7.0.0 so this causes some headacke for
>> binary applications:
> 
> Doesn't this mean you should slot it?
> 

No. I only want the .so.62 for binary apps, thus the ebuild won't
install anything but the shared libs.

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Mounir Lamouri]

Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>   
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:01:47 +0300
>> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>     
>>> media-libs/jpeg-7 installs .so.7.0.0 so this causes some headacke for
>>> binary applications:
>>>       
>> Doesn't this mean you should slot it?
>>     
> No. I only want the .so.62 for binary apps, thus the ebuild won't
> install anything but the shared libs
You wrote a header was now private so it will probably make a lot of
ebuilds incompatible with 7.0. Maybe slotting could be useful even for them.

Mounir

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Samuli Suominen]

Mounir Lamouri wrote:
>> No. I only want the .so.62 for binary apps, thus the ebuild won't
>> install anything but the shared libs
> You wrote a header was now private so it will probably make a lot of
> ebuilds incompatible with 7.0. Maybe slotting could be useful even for them.

No.

The include was always private but we patched 6b to install it for a
ancient bug involving media-gfx/feh.

Re: [gentoo-dev] New media-libs/jpeg-7 and how to deal with it.

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 536 bytes --]

On Saturday 22 August 2009 10:19:00 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Mounir Lamouri wrote:
> >> No. I only want the .so.62 for binary apps, thus the ebuild won't
> >> install anything but the shared libs
> >
> > You wrote a header was now private so it will probably make a lot of
> > ebuilds incompatible with 7.0. Maybe slotting could be useful even for
> > them.
>
> No.
>
> The include was always private but we patched 6b to install it for a
> ancient bug involving media-gfx/feh.

sounds correct to me.  ABI change only -> no SLOT.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]