From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 27 09:21:50 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 94EA71065672; Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:21:50 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:21:50 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Alex Dupre <ale@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20111227092150.GD66519@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201112241839.pBOIdPlh024053@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20111225154525.GA43948@FreeBSD.org>
	<CADLo839VJRebasTHAb-C8w7G68u2D+ZHSqwg0f6LoQH8D_0bTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20111225163848.GA51484@FreeBSD.org> <4EF988C0.2010808@FreeBSD.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4EF988C0.2010808@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>, cvs-ports@freebsd.org,
	cvs-all@freebsd.org, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>,
	ports-committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/kdelibs4 Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree
	<cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:21:50 -0000

On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 09:58:40AM +0100, Alex Dupre wrote:
> Alexey Dokuchaev ha scritto:
> >Per libungif's pkg-descr, it's not just being unencumbered by patents, but
> >also "implements a superset of that [giflib's] library's API".
> 
> It's a superset because it doesn't implement the LZW patented compression.

Shouldn't it read "subset" in this case then?

> >Regardless
> >of the possible API and patent issues, what makes libgif a 'preferred'
> >solution?
> 
> The fact that they shared the same codebase and now only giflib is
> developed (and has also LZW compression).

Ah, well, if giflib is currently being developed, and libungif is not (i.e.
essentially being abandonware), then I don't have any objection on moving to
giflib.  Thanks for the insight Alex.

./danfe