Your message dated Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:46:36 +0200
with message-id <20090917214636.gd20...@yellowpig>
and subject line Re: Bug#386896: rdjpgcom alters jpeg comment
has caused the Debian Bug report #386896,
regarding rdjpgcom alters jpeg comment
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
386896: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=386896
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libjpeg-progs
Version: 6b-10
The jpeg comment printed by the tool rdjpgcom differs from the jpeg
comment present in the jpeg file.
For example, rdjpegcom replaces "unprintable" bytes with a
backslash-sequence (see function process_COM in file rdjpgcom.c).
wrjpgcom, on the other hand, performs no alterations.
This is a problem if the comment is in a different encoding than the
system's locale, or if the comment is in a multibyte encoding (e.g. utf-8).
rdjpgcom should not modify the comment at all.
Tobias
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 7-1
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 12:33:09PM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > Suggestion: You could introduce a new command line option ("-raw" or
> > something) that leaves the comment untouched. Please set severity to
> > "wishlist", if you don't mind.
>
> Done. Is there a usage case that is not essentially unsafe ? rdjpgcom is
> only meant to be used in shell script where echo -e is available
> anyway.
I have written such patch and it has been accepted upstream in libjpeg7
which is now in Debian.
Thanks for your suggestion!
Cheers,
--
Bill. <[email protected]>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--- End Message ---
