Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont
Le jeudi, 8 janvier 2015, 11.37:45 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : Hi Chris, Quoting Chris Liddell (2015-01-08 08:31:45) On 07/01/15 21:06, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Le mercredi, 7 janvier 2015, 12.17:43 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : This is fixed in upstream's 9.14. I'll see with the release team if we can backport this into Jessie. Great. But what about its licensing? I guess upstream treat it as AGPL, so we may risk disagreeing with them if we choose to ignore that - e.g. by treating it as too small to be copyright-protected. Best is to ask I guess. Let's try to see what the upstream author of the patch says. Hereby CC'ing him. Chris: We (Debian) want to include your patch for the Ghostscript bug 695031 don't assume we can read a font file, but we are wondering about its licensing situation. Debian is shipping ghostscript 9.06, licensed under GPL-3, but you included this patch in ghostscript 9.14, which is licensed under AGPL. We have three options: a) consider your patch as too small to be copyright-protected. This would allow us to include is in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be nice to have your confirmation on this though. b) get your patch also GPL-licensed, allowing us to include it in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be mandatory to have an explicit statement from you (as author of the patch) on that. c) None of the above, leaving the bug open for Debian Jessie, thereby leaving our users with a bug in our next stable release. Needless to say we'd prefer any of the two above solutions. Cheers, and thanks in advance, So, for clarity, that will be this commit: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=blobdiff;f=gs/Resource/ Init/gs_fonts.ps;h=8ab6872e (or, for convenience: http://tinyurl.com/pvr4acp ) We'd have no problem with you patching an older, non-AGPL release with that - we'd regard it as being covered by your a case above. It's also a sufficiently obvious solution that any competent Postscript programmer would almost certainly come up with the same solution, which would make copyright enforcement decidedly questionable, too. So go ahead and use that patch. In the interests of the usual legal disclaimers, though, this only applies to the particular patch linked above, so any other patches in the future will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Thanks, Chris, for taking the time with this. Your judgement makes good sense, and is obviously helpful for us. Indeed, thank you very much! Cheers, OdyX signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont
Hi Chris, Quoting Chris Liddell (2015-01-08 08:31:45) On 07/01/15 21:06, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Le mercredi, 7 janvier 2015, 12.17:43 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : This is fixed in upstream's 9.14. I'll see with the release team if we can backport this into Jessie. Great. But what about its licensing? I guess upstream treat it as AGPL, so we may risk disagreeing with them if we choose to ignore that - e.g. by treating it as too small to be copyright-protected. Best is to ask I guess. Let's try to see what the upstream author of the patch says. Hereby CC'ing him. Chris: We (Debian) want to include your patch for the Ghostscript bug 695031 don't assume we can read a font file, but we are wondering about its licensing situation. Debian is shipping ghostscript 9.06, licensed under GPL-3, but you included this patch in ghostscript 9.14, which is licensed under AGPL. We have three options: a) consider your patch as too small to be copyright-protected. This would allow us to include is in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be nice to have your confirmation on this though. b) get your patch also GPL-licensed, allowing us to include it in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be mandatory to have an explicit statement from you (as author of the patch) on that. c) None of the above, leaving the bug open for Debian Jessie, thereby leaving our users with a bug in our next stable release. Needless to say we'd prefer any of the two above solutions. Cheers, and thanks in advance, So, for clarity, that will be this commit: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=blobdiff;f=gs/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps;h=8ab6872e (or, for convenience: http://tinyurl.com/pvr4acp ) We'd have no problem with you patching an older, non-AGPL release with that - we'd regard it as being covered by your a case above. It's also a sufficiently obvious solution that any competent Postscript programmer would almost certainly come up with the same solution, which would make copyright enforcement decidedly questionable, too. So go ahead and use that patch. In the interests of the usual legal disclaimers, though, this only applies to the particular patch linked above, so any other patches in the future will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Thanks, Chris, for taking the time with this. Your judgement makes good sense, and is obviously helpful for us. - 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
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont
On 07/01/15 21:06, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: Le mercredi, 7 janvier 2015, 12.17:43 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : This is fixed in upstream's 9.14. I'll see with the release team if we can backport this into Jessie. Great. But what about its licensing? I guess upstream treat it as AGPL, so we may risk disagreeing with them if we choose to ignore that - e.g. by treating it as too small to be copyright-protected. Best is to ask I guess. Let's try to see what the upstream author of the patch says. Hereby CC'ing him. Chris: We (Debian) want to include your patch for the Ghostscript bug 695031 don't assume we can read a font file, but we are wondering about its licensing situation. Debian is shipping ghostscript 9.06, licensed under GPL-3, but you included this patch in ghostscript 9.14, which is licensed under AGPL. We have three options: a) consider your patch as too small to be copyright-protected. This would allow us to include is in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be nice to have your confirmation on this though. b) get your patch also GPL-licensed, allowing us to include it in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be mandatory to have an explicit statement from you (as author of the patch) on that. c) None of the above, leaving the bug open for Debian Jessie, thereby leaving our users with a bug in our next stable release. Needless to say we'd prefer any of the two above solutions. Cheers, and thanks in advance, So, for clarity, that will be this commit: http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=blobdiff;f=gs/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps;h=8ab6872e (or, for convenience: http://tinyurl.com/pvr4acp ) We'd have no problem with you patching an older, non-AGPL release with that - we'd regard it as being covered by your a case above. It's also a sufficiently obvious solution that any competent Postscript programmer would almost certainly come up with the same solution, which would make copyright enforcement decidedly questionable, too. So go ahead and use that patch. In the interests of the usual legal disclaimers, though, this only applies to the particular patch linked above, so any other patches in the future will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. All the best, Chris -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont (was: Patch is obviously not in updates.)
Le mercredi, 7 janvier 2015, 12.17:43 Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : This is fixed in upstream's 9.14. I'll see with the release team if we can backport this into Jessie. Great. But what about its licensing? I guess upstream treat it as AGPL, so we may risk disagreeing with them if we choose to ignore that - e.g. by treating it as too small to be copyright-protected. Best is to ask I guess. Let's try to see what the upstream author of the patch says. Hereby CC'ing him. Chris: We (Debian) want to include your patch for the Ghostscript bug 695031 don't assume we can read a font file, but we are wondering about its licensing situation. Debian is shipping ghostscript 9.06, licensed under GPL-3, but you included this patch in ghostscript 9.14, which is licensed under AGPL. We have three options: a) consider your patch as too small to be copyright-protected. This would allow us to include is in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be nice to have your confirmation on this though. b) get your patch also GPL-licensed, allowing us to include it in GPL'd ghostscript 9.06. It'd be mandatory to have an explicit statement from you (as author of the patch) on that. c) None of the above, leaving the bug open for Debian Jessie, thereby leaving our users with a bug in our next stable release. Needless to say we'd prefer any of the two above solutions. Cheers, and thanks in advance, Didier Raboud, aka OdyX signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont with fonts-font-awesome installed
Control: tags -1 + patch
Fixed in upstream git now [1], patch adapted and included inline below
applies cleanly to the current Debian package and works there as well.
Please consider applying this patch to the next source update, otherwise
will be fixed in ghostscript 9.11 when that is released.
From f4584b0e162a96ec143f0057de63c116e649e02b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Liddell chris.lidd...@artifex.com
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:15:56 +
Subject: [PATCH] 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.
---
Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps | 20 ++--
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps b/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
index a597c5a..8ab6872 100644
--- a/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
+++ b/Resource/Init/gs_fonts.ps
@@ -385,12 +385,20 @@ systemdict /NONATIVEFONTMAP known .setnativefontmapbuilt
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
--
1.7.9.5
[1] http://git.ghostscript.com/?p=ghostpdl.git;a=commitdiff;h=f4584b0e
Thanks,
--
mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont with fonts-font-awesome installed
Quoting Mike Miller (2014-02-12 15:22:15) Fixed in upstream git now [1], patch adapted and included inline below applies cleanly to the current Debian package and works there as well. Please consider applying this patch to the next source update, otherwise will be fixed in ghostscript 9.11 when that is released. Great. Thanks a lot! - 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
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont with fonts-font-awesome installed
Control: tags -1 + upstream I've confirmed this error occurs on upstream git master, reported upstream as well [1]. [1] http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=695031 Thanks, -- mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont with fonts-font-awesome installed
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 21:14:59 -0500, Mike Miller wrote: Ghostscript produces the following error when operating on a postscript file that references an unknown font name, but only when the fonts-font-awesome package is installed: After a bit more digging and narrowing down, this error seems to be completely due to any WOFF fonts installed under /usr/share/fonts. This is apparently a new font format that ghostscript doesn't seem to know what to do with. There are two packages in the Debian archive that install WOFF fonts under /usr/share/fonts so far, fonts-font-awesome and fonts-meera-taml. Installing either of those packages produces this ghostscript error. Manually deleting just the .woff file from either package and re-running fc-cache -s restores ghostscript to working order. This serves as a workaround for me for now. -- mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#732440: ghostscript: Error: /typecheck in /findfont with fonts-font-awesome installed
Package: ghostscript Version: 9.05~dfsg-8+b1 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, Ghostscript produces the following error when operating on a postscript file that references an unknown font name, but only when the fonts-font-awesome package is installed: $ cat test.ps %!PS-Adobe-2.0 /NotInstalledFont findfont 20 scalefont setfont 100 500 moveto (Hello world) show showpage $ gs -dQUIET -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -dSAFER -sDEVICE=pdfwrite \ -dEmbedAllFonts=true -dOptimize=true -sOutputFile=test.pdf test.ps Error: /typecheck in /findfont Operand stack: NotInstalledFont Execution stack: %interp_exit .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- false 1 %stopped_push 1910 1 3 %oparray_pop 1909 1 3 %oparray_pop 1893 1 3 %oparray_pop 1787 1 3 %oparray_pop --nostringval-- %errorexec_pop .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- 1868 1 3 %oparray_pop Dictionary stack: --dict:1164/1684(ro)(G)-- --dict:0/20(G)-- --dict:77/200(L)-- Current allocation mode is local Current file position is 42 GPL Ghostscript 9.05: Unrecoverable error, exit code 1 Removing the fonts-font-awesome package restores the correct behavior, which is that ghostscript does not find a matching font and falls back to Courier. I used strace to determine that the awesome font was the most recent file opened by ghostscript before it exited. The fonts-font-awesome package was recently installed as a new dependency of the latest texlive-fonts-extra package. This behavior looks somewhat similar to this upstream bug report: http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=694790 -- System Information: Debian Release: jessie/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (1, 'experimental'), (1, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Foreign Architectures: i386 Kernel: Linux 3.11-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash Versions of packages ghostscript depends on: ii debconf [debconf-2.0] 1.5.52 ii gsfonts1:8.11+urwcyr1.0.7~pre44-4.2 ii libc6 2.17-97 ii libgs9 9.05~dfsg-8+b1 ghostscript recommends no packages. Versions of packages ghostscript suggests: ii ghostscript-cups 9.05~dfsg-8+b1 ii ghostscript-x 9.05~dfsg-8+b1 ii hpijs 3.13.4-1 -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
