| 1 |
On 06/01/2011 10:15 PM, Christopher Head wrote: |
| 2 |
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 3 |
> Hash: SHA1 |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:33:03 +0300 |
| 6 |
> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
>> libjpeg-turbo stabilization is happening for amd64/x86 at |
| 9 |
>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/360715 |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> - the gentoo-x86 has been converted to virtual/jpeg to support this. |
| 12 |
>> - we have no bugs reported against the package. |
| 13 |
>> - libjpeg-turbo is default in virtual/jpeg |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> so just heads up. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Hi everyone, |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Just a user, not a developer, but: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> The third point of this message made me wonder about something. New |
| 23 |
> installs will get libjpeg-turbo, as it's the default. Old users may |
| 24 |
> never know it exists! It seems that making lbjpeg-turbo the default |
| 25 |
> implementation of virtual/jpeg is expressing some small preference in |
| 26 |
> favour of it, but old users will never be presented with the choice to |
| 27 |
> switch. It seems like this is a bit of a gap in package management, |
| 28 |
> that even if a "better" package becomes available and becomes the |
| 29 |
> default implementation of a virtual, existing users will keep using the |
| 30 |
> "worse" package for no other reason than that it's already installed |
| 31 |
> (and there's no message anywhere even telling them that the change |
| 32 |
> happened). |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Does anyone think this is suboptimal and that it might be nice to |
| 35 |
> investigate alternatives? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
A couple of alternatives come to mind: |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
A) Create a news item to notify people who have media-libs/jpeg |
| 40 |
installed that there is an alternative. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
B) Put media-libs/jpeg in package.mask, so that migration happens |
| 43 |
automatically. |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Thanks, |
| 46 |
Zac |
Archives