debian-release, We have a couple of nasty (RC) bugs against digikam (crashes startup) caused if the user has corrupted meta-data within their JPEG images.
The crash is caused by poor handling of exiv2 libraries, which has been fixed in subsequent revisions of exiv2. unstable has 0.10, upstream has 0.12. digikam upstream have said that exiv2 0.12 is the solution for a large number of crashes. I am proposing to do a NMU of exiv2 to bring unstable upto 0.12. Upstream change log outlines a number of similar crash conditions which are fixed: http://www.exiv2.org/changelog.html The Debian package maintainer, Peter KELEMEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> hasn't updated the package since Jun, and appears to be MIA. I have tried contacting the maintainer a couple of times, via #389711, about shared maintainership with no response. I uploaded the last NMU of this package to fix a RC bug. Peter, if you are still interested, please respond. ufraw is the only package, which I don't maintain which also has a dependancy on exiv2 and they are Cc:ed on this email. debian-release, please endorse this plan to upgrade exiv2. Thanks, Mark ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: [Pkg-kde-extras] Re: [Digikam-devel] 0.9.0-RC2 packages for testing From: "Achim Bohnet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, December 6, 2006 12:27 am To: "digiKam developers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Wednesday, 6. December 2006 00:55, Achim Bohnet wrote: > On Tuesday, 5. December 2006 20:58, Marcel Wiesweg wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have uploaded the 0.9.0-rc2 tarballs for testing at > > > > http://digikam3rdparty.free.fr/0.9.0-rc2/digikam-0.9.0-rc2.tar.bz2 > > http://digikam3rdparty.free.fr/0.9.0-rc2/digikamimageplugins-0.9.0-rc2.tar.bz2 > > Hi Marcel, > > Heh, I've build an deb pkg but did not have exiv2 0.12 installed. Hi Gilles, is exiv2 really necessary (ignoring localisation;) Debian is short before freeze for etch and has exiv2 0.10 as a pkgs in it's archive. How 'dangerous' is an exiv2 0.10 -> 0.12 upgrade? Is there a soname changed involded? aka will apps build against 0.10 still run when exiv2 0.12 is installed without a rebuild? (sorry to late to try it now. I'm sure don't get it right without some sleep). We, the debian pkg maintainers have to decide about if patching configure/digikam to accept 0.10 or uploading 0.12, shortly before the new etch release, is the less dangerous option. A quick check shows that exiv2 is used by debian pkgs: digikamimageplugins digikam ufraw kphotoalbum gimp-ufraw If a quick exiv2 0.12 upload would breaks them, we get 'killed' by the debian release managers. Thanks for any hint, Achim > make and make install did not complain but no digikam and > showfoto in /usr/bin/. > > Would be nice to either get configure or make fail when > not all prerequisites are available ;) > > Achim > > > > Marcel > > _______________________________________________ > > Digikam-devel mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel > > > > > > -- > To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is > a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. > You discover truth everytime you use it. > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-devel > > -- To me vi is Zen. To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated. You discover truth everytime you use it. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ pkg-kde-extras mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-extras -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]