On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 12:57 +0200, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 09:37 +0200, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 09:30 +0200, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
I agree that having the name of the installed lib the same is exactly what one wants. I disagree, however, that the name of the RPM to get this installed is the same and offers no clue as to the nature of the library that will be installed. So, I cannot look at the list of installed RPMs to determine if libjpeg.so.62.0.0 is the -turbo or the non-turbo variant.
Having said all that, I am glad the turbo version is available. I guess I am just nit picking about how one can easily verify that it is installed.
Well, the name of the package is dictated by the shared library packaging policy. Additionally, having the same PKG name for libjpeg and libjpeg-turbo (so in both cases libjpeg62) actually guarantees that the two packages are not installable in parallel (which would certainly conflict on file level).
Really? libjpeg-turbo does NOT even contain a library. It is only the command line wrappers. So it in fact does NOT contain anything -turbo. This was what confused me. I could very well have libjpeg-turbo installed, and a standard (non-turbo version) libjpeg. There is no overlap in the binaries in these two RPMS and they have different names. Both can very easily be installed.
PKG name for the lib is in both cases libjpeg62 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org