tags 494227 + patch pending
thanks
Hi,
The following is the diff for my proposed
xmlroff 0.6.0-1.1 NMU.
Unfortunately, Martin, it makes the Debian refcard look ugly.
Nonetheless, I believe moving from segfault to quirky output
warrants closing the RC bug here. As such, I'll upload in the
next days unless someone objects.
Kind regards
T.
diff -u xmlroff-0.6.0/debian/changelog xmlroff-0.6.0/debian/changelog
--- xmlroff-0.6.0/debian/changelog
+++ xmlroff-0.6.0/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+xmlroff (0.6.0-1.1) unstable; urgency=low
+
+ * Non-maintainer upload.
+ * Eliminate segfault in fo-area-table-row.c
+ fo_area_table_row_split_before_height.
+ Closes: #494227
+
+ -- Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:45:53 +0200
+
xmlroff (0.6.0-1) unstable; urgency=low
* New upstream release 0.6.0.
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- xmlroff-0.6.0.orig/libfo/area/fo-area-table-row.c
+++ xmlroff-0.6.0/libfo/area/fo-area-table-row.c
@@ -400,15 +400,20 @@
split_child = fo_area_split_before_height (use_child_area,
max_height);
- fo_area_unlink (split_child);
- fo_area_append (clone, split_child);
-
- max_remaining_child_height =
- MAX (max_remaining_child_height,
- fo_area_area_get_height (use_child_area));
- max_split_child_height =
- MAX (max_split_child_height,
- fo_area_area_get_height (split_child));
+ if (split_child != NULL)
+ {
+ fo_area_unlink (split_child);
+ fo_area_append (clone, split_child);
+
+ max_remaining_child_height =
+ MAX (max_remaining_child_height,
+ fo_area_area_get_height (use_child_area));
+ max_split_child_height =
+ MAX (max_split_child_height,
+ fo_area_area_get_height (split_child));
+ }
+ else
+ g_warning ("Need better fix.");
use_child_area = fo_area_next_sibling (use_child_area);
}
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
