IJG libjpeg vs libjpeg-turbo

Tomasz Pala gotar at polanet.pl
Fri Jan 18 16:39:11 CET 2013

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 15:55:55 +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:

> One solution could be to ship libjpeg-turbo as libjpeg.so.6 (or even
> libjpeg.so.8, doesn't matter much) with development libjpeg.so symlink
> (so by default we get SIMD-accelerated basic JPEG support) and ship
> libjpeg 9 (as libjpeg.so.9) with different development symlink
> (libjpeg9.so or maybe libjpeg-ijg.so).

+1 (turbo as libjpeg.so.8)

Assuming linked rationale is valid, libjpeg8c+ might be not widely required:

"Most of the recent IJG changes (post 
jpeg-8b) have been related to lossless JPEG encoding or SmartScale. 
Best case, SmartScale is a new format that has not been adopted as a 
standard yet and is not widely used, and worst case, it may be a mostly 
useless extension.  The IJG's method for generating lossless JPEG files 
using SmartScale is interesting, but I struggle to think of a reason why 
one would want to use SmartScale for any other purpose"

> Disadvantages:
> - it needs identification of packages relying on libjpeg 7+
>   functionality and patching them to link with -ljpeg9

- why 7+?
- are there any apps like this?

Tomasz Pala <gotar at pld-linux.org>

More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list