On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 06:05:52PM +0300, Fathi Boudra wrote: >> Hi Bill, >> >> For information, we have an ITP running: http://bugs.debian.org/612341 >> >> > libjpeg-turbo only support the old libjpeg62 interface and not the new >> > libjpeg8 one, >> > which support more image format, and provide higher image quality. >> >> libjpeg-turbo supports v7 or v8 emulation. > > I do not think it is perfect, in the sens that programs that works under > libjpeg8 > can fail to work under libjpeg-turbo.
All of our current tests are using v62. I hope to come with some v8 results asap. Do you have some known issues to point or specific programs failling? I'm interested to push these issues upstream and fix them. >> > Unfortunately the libjpeg-turbo improvements carry a different license >> > than the IJG libjpeg >> > library, so it is unlikely they get merged. >> >> Even if it's unlikely ljt and IJG libjpeg get merged, it makes sense >> to provide ljt as an alternative > > It is unlikely to be merged since libjpeg-turbo use a different license than > libjpeg. > >> to people that want to benefit from the performance gain (e.g. ARM >> architecture) which is the goal of the ITP. > > Does libjpeg-turbo actually improve performance on ARM ? Last time I check, > accelerated support were only available for x86/x86-64. Tom Gall is looking into it. Accelerated support is available on ARM and LJT supports also Android (if it matters). We expect to have some improvements for 1.2 release. Current tests results on 1.1.90 are worse than libjpeg62: http://wiki.linaro.org/TomGall/LibJpegTurbo The benchmark numbers are very suspect. An update is due shortly. The tjbench tool just was ported to the old libjpeg 62 so we can have apples to apples comparisons. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
