On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 08:56, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > Applied. However, I think there is a mistake for the
> > > SingleSubstFormat1 case:
> > >
> > > idx = otv_Coverage_get_first( Coverage ) + DeltaGlyphID;
> > > if ( idx < 0 ||
> > > idx + DeltaGlyphID < 0 ||
> > > (FT_UInt)idx + DeltaGlyphID >= valid->glyph_count )
> > > FT_INVALID_GLYPH_ID;
> > >
> > > The code adds DeltaGlyphID to idx, and then you are checking
> > > whether `idx + DeltaGlyphID < 0'... This looks wrong to me. I
> > > don't have time currently to verify this. Please post a patch if
> > > necessary.
> >
> > DeltaGlyphID can be a negative value, so I think it's a reasonable
> > check.
>
> Well, yes, but I would expect this code:
I beg your pardon, you are quite right. That entire patch chunk was
wrong (and unneeded in the first place). This should back it out.
--- otvgsub.c~ 2007-08-10 16:27:31.000000000 -0700
+++ otvgsub.c 2007-08-10 16:27:31.000000000 -0700
@@ -71,16 +71,12 @@
otv_Coverage_validate( Coverage, valid, -1 );
idx = otv_Coverage_get_first( Coverage ) + DeltaGlyphID;
- if ( idx < 0 ||
- idx + DeltaGlyphID < 0 ||
- (FT_UInt)idx + DeltaGlyphID >= valid->glyph_count )
- FT_INVALID_GLYPH_ID;
+ if ( idx < 0 )
+ FT_INVALID_DATA;
idx = otv_Coverage_get_last( Coverage ) + DeltaGlyphID;
- if ( (FT_UInt)idx >= valid->glyph_count ||
- idx + DeltaGlyphID < 0 ||
- (FT_UInt)idx + DeltaGlyphID >= valid->glyph_count )
- FT_INVALID_GLYPH_ID;
+ if ( (FT_UInt)idx >= valid->glyph_count )
+ FT_INVALID_DATA;
}
break;
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
Freetype-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
