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. _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
