libjpeg vs. libjpeg-turbo

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Friday May 22 2015 17:28:31 Mihai Moldovan wrote:


> > also, that’s ridiculous since we only officially support the current and previous OS release (and we probably shouldn’t be helping people to keep running systems that aren’t receiving security patches from Apple anymore).
> 
> That was my initial reaction, too, but I feel that we shouldn't break
> functionality that was provided free-of-charge (regarding maintenance) until now.

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7050414.html

> We could craft a solution to keep jpeg around that based on arch (ppc) or
> version (darwin 8 and lower), but that would mean we essentially get 2 ports in

As I've argued earlier, I think we'll want to keep port:jpeg around anyway, for the simple reason that no one can foresee if and when software will start using jpeg9 features ... or even features from a future version. It'd be stupid to have to reintroduce the port then, rather than beginning the whole transition with moving libjpeg to an install location where it can co-exist with other libraries. I've submitted a draft proposal for that on trac earlier today.

R.