libjpeg: Submission

[essandess]

Description

Type(s)

• bugfix
• enhancement
• security fix

Tested on

macOS x.y
Xcode x.y / Command Line Tools x.y.z

Verification

Have you

• followed our Commit Message Guidelines?
• squashed and minimized your commits?
• checked that there aren't other open pull requests for the same change?
• referenced existing tickets on Trac with full URL in commit message?
• checked your Portfile with port lint?
• tried existing tests with sudo port test?
• tried a full install with sudo port -vst install?
• tested basic functionality of all binary files?
• checked that the Portfile's most important variants haven't been broken?

[ryandesign]

I was originally going to ask whether we really need another jpeg library in MacPorts when we already have two: IJG libjpeg in the jpeg port and its libjpeg-turbo fork.

Then I saw that according to the build log, the only file that got installed was /opt/local/bin/jpeg. No library was installed. Naming the port libjpeg is thus confusing.

[barracuda156]

It builds fine, but is it possible to enable verbose output? Otherwise the build hides commands, it is unclear what is it doing and which flags are used.

[Dave-Allured]

@ryandesign said:

Then I saw that according to the build log, the only file that got installed was /opt/local/bin/jpeg. No library was installed. Naming the port libjpeg is thus confusing.

I looked at the upstream repo and the mother org website, jpeg.org; trying to figure out the reason for this alternative jpeg library. Conclusions:

• For port name I suggest "jpeg-xt" as distinctive and most appropriate for the library's actual mission. Yes indeed, this name does NOT match the upstream repo name. Perhaps they need a better repo name.
• For the executable I also suggest "jpeg-xt" to correspond.
• If it is later decided to install library files, I suggest "jpeg-xt" as the root name, for the same reasons.

Perhaps someone should search for other naming precedents by other packaging repositories. I am out of time for now on this one.

Final note, this package is advertised as a complete reference implementation of the updated JPEG XT standards. Therefore IMO it is well worthy of inclusion as a distinct MacPorts port.

[essandess]

Thanks, I've implemented the name changes you suggest.

I looked at the upstream repo and the mother org website, jpeg.org; trying to figure out the reason for this alternative jpeg library. Conclusions:

• For port name I suggest "jpeg-xt" as distinctive and most appropriate for the library's actual mission. Yes indeed, this name does NOT match the upstream repo name. Perhaps they need a better repo name.
• For the executable I also suggest "jpeg-xt" to correspond.