Processed: Re: Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-14 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands:

 tags -1 -moreinfo
Bug #774759 [release.debian.org] [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2
Removed tag(s) moreinfo.

-- 
774759: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=774759
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.b774759.142123872026511.transcr...@bugs.debian.org



Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-14 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
Control: tags -1 -moreinfo

Le mercredi, 14 janvier 2015, 00.15:43 Ivo De Decker a écrit :
 OK, please go ahead and remove the moreinfo tag from this bug once the
 upload is in unstable.

Uploaded, and built by the buildds.

Cheers,
OdyX


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2035455.zHbze3Vvvl@gyllingar



Processed: Re: Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-13 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing control commands:

 tags -1 confirmed moreinfo
Bug #774759 [release.debian.org] [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2
Added tag(s) confirmed and moreinfo.

-- 
774759: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=774759
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/handler.s.b774759.142119095120933.transcr...@bugs.debian.org



Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-13 Thread Ivo De Decker
Control: tags -1 confirmed moreinfo

Hi,

On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:22:32PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
 Le mercredi, 7 janvier 2015, 12.13:31 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
  Newer Ghostscript is licensed AGPL.  Is that patch compatible with the
  more relaxed licensing of older Ghostscript?
 
 The original author of the patch has confirmed that it is okay, see 
 https://lists.debian.org/54ae3261.8000...@artifex.com 
 
 The updated patch and debdiff's are attached.

OK, please go ahead and remove the moreinfo tag from this bug once the upload
is in unstable.

Cheers,

Ivo


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150113231542.ga6...@ugent.be



Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-07 Thread Didier 'OdyX' Raboud
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian@packages.debian.org
Usertags: unblock

Dear RT,

I'd like to get the patch for #732440 included in Jessie. The bug was
reported three independent times and is a premature abort in Ghostscript
processing. The patch that fixes that bug was included in upstream's
9.14 version and can be directly cherry-picked on top of 9.06~dfsg-1 as
currently in jessie.

Here goes the proposed changelog:

ghostscript (9.06~dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium

  * Add patch cherry-picked upstream to fix /typecheck error in /findfont
(Closes: #732440)

The cherry-picked patch as well as the full debdiff are attached.

TIA, cheers,

OdyX
diff -Nru ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/changelog ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/changelog
--- ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/changelog	2014-08-27 04:08:44.0 +0200
+++ ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/changelog	2015-01-07 08:28:03.0 +0100
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+ghostscript (9.06~dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium
+
+  * Add patch cherry-picked upstream to fix /typecheck error in /findfont
+(Closes: #732440)
+
+ -- Didier Raboud o...@debian.org  Wed, 07 Jan 2015 08:27:52 +0100
+
 ghostscript (9.06~dfsg-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * Team upload
diff -Nru ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/020140211~f4584b0.patch ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/020140211~f4584b0.patch
--- ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/020140211~f4584b0.patch	1970-01-01 01:00:00.0 +0100
+++ ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/020140211~f4584b0.patch	2015-01-07 08:26:20.0 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+From: Chris Liddell chris.lidd...@artifex.com
+Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:15:56 + (+)
+Subject: Bug 695031: don't assume we can read a font file
+X-Git-Tag: ghostpdl-9.12rc1~50
+X-Git-Url: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=f4584b0e162a96ec143f0057de63c116e649e02b
+Bug-Debian: https://bugs.debian.org/732440
+
+Bug 695031: don't assume we can read a font file
+
+When we scan system fonts, we were assuming fonts found would be in a format
+Ghostscript understands. This is not necessarily the case.
+
+So put the minimal parsing call to get the font's name in a stopped context,
+so we can skip the file it's not an understandable format. And clean up the
+stack in the event we try such a file.
+
+No cluster differences.
+---
+
+--- a/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
 b/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
+@@ -385,12 +385,20 @@
+ pop pop pop
+   }{
+ % we could open the font file
+-.findfontname
+-not { dup 0 get } if  % stack: (newname) [ (name) (path) ]
+-% DEBUG { (  found ) print dup print (\n) print flush } if
+-% add entry to the fontmap
+-1 index exch 0 exch dup type /nametype ne {cvn} if put
+-aload pop .definefontmap
++mark 2 1 roll
++{.findfontname} stopped
++{
++  cleartomark
++  pop pop
++}
++{
++  3 -1 roll pop
++  not { dup 0 get } if  % stack: (newname) [ (name) (path) ]
++  % DEBUG { (  found ) print dup print (\n) print flush } if
++  % add entry to the fontmap
++  1 index exch 0 exch dup type /nametype ne {cvn} if put
++  aload pop .definefontmap
++} ifelse
+   } ifelse
+ } forall
+   } if
diff -Nru ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/series ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/series
--- ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/series	2014-08-27 03:59:17.0 +0200
+++ ghostscript-9.06~dfsg/debian/patches/series	2015-01-07 08:25:44.0 +0100
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
 020121130~a3d00da.patch
 020130619~1b87b82.patch
 020130619~daceba6.patch
+020140211~f4584b0.patch
 1001_document_inkcov_device.patch
 2001_docdir_fix_for_debian.patch
 2002_gs_man_fix_debian.patch
From: Chris Liddell chris.lidd...@artifex.com
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:15:56 + (+)
Subject: Bug 695031: don't assume we can read a font file
X-Git-Tag: ghostpdl-9.12rc1~50
X-Git-Url: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=f4584b0e162a96ec143f0057de63c116e649e02b
Bug-Debian: https://bugs.debian.org/732440

Bug 695031: don't assume we can read a font file

When we scan system fonts, we were assuming fonts found would be in a format
Ghostscript understands. This is not necessarily the case.

So put the minimal parsing call to get the font's name in a stopped context,
so we can skip the file it's not an understandable format. And clean up the
stack in the event we try such a file.

No cluster differences.
---

--- a/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
+++ b/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
@@ -385,12 +385,20 @@
 pop pop pop
   }{
 % we could open the font file
-.findfontname
-not { dup 0 get } if  % stack: (newname) [ (name) (path) ]
-% DEBUG { (  found ) print dup print (\n) print flush } if
-% add entry to the fontmap
-1 index exch 0 exch dup type /nametype ne {cvn} if put
-

Bug#774759: [pre-approval] unblock: ghostscript/9.06~dfsg-2

2015-01-07 Thread Jonas Smedegaard
Quoting Didier 'OdyX' Raboud (2015-01-07 09:20:05)
 I'd like to get the patch for #732440 included in Jessie. The bug was 
 reported three independent times and is a premature abort in 
 Ghostscript processing. The patch that fixes that bug was included in 
 upstream's 9.14 version and can be directly cherry-picked on top of 
 9.06~dfsg-1 as currently in jessie.
 
 Here goes the proposed changelog:
 
 ghostscript (9.06~dfsg-2) unstable; urgency=medium
 
   * Add patch cherry-picked upstream to fix /typecheck error in /findfont
 (Closes: #732440)
 
 The cherry-picked patch as well as the full debdiff are attached.

Newer Ghostscript is licensed AGPL.  Is that patch compatible with the 
more relaxed licensing of older Ghostscript?


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist  Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature