This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [ITA] jasper: JPEG 2000 library
Dr. Volker Zell wrote:
Corinna Vinschen writes:
> On Apr 1 00:25, Dr. Volker Zell wrote:
>> I would like to adopt and maintain the 'jasper' package from Gerrit P.Haase and
>> split it into 'jasper/libjasper17011/libjasper-devel' packages.
> Huh? libjasper*17011*? Did we have so many versions of libjasper already? ;)
> Just out of curiosity, what does this big number mean here?
Actually I forgot to ask on the list before packaging. But it's not too
late. I can still repackage if we sort it out.
The actual source package is jasper-1.701.0.zip. The cygwin release will
be revision 2.
libtool for jasper-1.701.0 creates cygjasper-1-701-1.dll
So how should we name the corresponding library package:
libtool for jasper-1.900.1 creates cygjasper-1.dll
In this case we have libjasper1-1.900.1-1.tar.bz2
Here are the rpm names reported on Mandriva:
libjasper1 (which is from src dist 1.900.1) contains:
It looks like the upstream folks wized up by the time 1.900.1 was
released. However, since Volker is proposing 1.701.0, that means even
the upstream source is versioned...strangely. I'm not sure why Mandriva
labels the -devel/-static-devel packages strangely; it's not as if they
are trying to allow both 1.701-devel and 1.900-devel packages to
coexist: the rpms contain overlapping files, and so are marked 'conflict'.
However, with regards to the packages which contain the SO's, note that
the version number is the same for both 1.701 and for 1.900. Thus, if we
ever get a 1.900 version of libjasper, I bet its DLLNUM will STILL be
'0', because the upstream folks are relying on the entire SONAME being
different to prevent the 1.701 and 1.900 libraries from clashing.
So, we should too.
I'd recommend the following tarballs for version 1.701.0 releases:
Then later, there might be
(See? if you want to install both DLLs from 1.701 and 1.900, you better
not name the 1.701 DLL package "libjasper0" -- if I am right about the
jasper folks' odd treatment of libtool/SOVER numbering during the