Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-22 Thread DRC
tream patch to subversion trunk, as well as branches/1.4.x and branches/1.3.x. On 11/22/14 2:06 PM, roucaries bastien wrote: On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 6:58 PM, DRC wrote: I can readily reproduce the failure with the supplied test case, but what I'm tripping on right now is understanding why

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-22 Thread DRC
happen again in the future. On 11/22/14 2:06 PM, roucaries bastien wrote: On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 6:58 PM, DRC wrote: I can readily reproduce the failure with the supplied test case, but what I'm tripping on right now is understanding why a Huffman-encoded block can grow so much larger

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-22 Thread DRC
I can readily reproduce the failure with the supplied test case, but what I'm tripping on right now is understanding why a Huffman-encoded block can grow so much larger than the size of the source block (128 bytes.) While this test case is very unusual, there may be others out there, and I wan

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-21 Thread DRC
ocal buffer is overrun. At this point, I'm stymied. If someone can point me to the place in the ImageMagick code where this is happening, I can at least take a look at how they're calling the transformer and see how it differs from how I'm calling the transformer. On 11/1

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-14 Thread DRC
s more then 128 but this info should probably > give the maintainers of libjpegturbo a bit more information to > investigate this issue. > >> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 9:33 PM, DRC wrote: >> I don't know why you would expect me to have tried that, given that there >> was no r

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-07 Thread DRC
es bastien wrote: On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 6:36 PM, DRC wrote: I want exactly what I asked for: a way to reproduce this issue. Currently I cannot. A backtrace from your machine is not helpful, as it does not tell me anything regarding how the library is being used by ImageMagick. Did you try

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-07 Thread DRC
:57 PM, DRC wrote: Happy to fix it, but I need to be able to reproduce it first, using only libjpeg-turbo. Currently I cannot. I tried running Here a backtrace, do you want to get some argument of the call function ? #0 0x77067107 in __GI_raise (sig=sig@entry=6) at ../nptl/sysdeps/unix

Bug#768369: Acknowledgement ([libjpeg62-turbo] [DOS] Stack smashing)

2014-11-07 Thread DRC
Happy to fix it, but I need to be able to reproduce it first, using only libjpeg-turbo. Currently I cannot. I tried running jpegtran -optimize -rotate 270 003632r270.jpg >out.jpg and jpegtran -progressive -optimize -rotate 270 003632r270.jpg >out.jpg with valgrind, and no issues were de

Bug#612341: shlib-calls-exit in lib*jpeg*'s

2013-03-20 Thread DRC
exit() is called by error_exit() in jerror.c, which is part of the libjpeg source. error_exit() is part of the standard error manager for libjpeg. Applications do not have to use that error manager. The TurboJPEG wrapper, specifically, uses its own custom error manager that will catch errors

Bug#602034: (no subject)

2013-02-08 Thread DRC
Just FYI-- Fedora has scrapped its plans to update to the libjpeg v8 ABI, and further research (http://www.libjpeg-turbo.org/About/SmartScale) has raised questions/concerns regarding whether the features introduced in libjpeg v7 and later really solve any problems that couldn't already be solve

Bug#612341: Regarding libjpeg-turbo

2012-12-30 Thread DRC
ize for the success of our codec. I have never done anything other than attempt to meet the demands of the open source community, and libjpeg-turbo is thus a product of that community. DRC -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#601386: Etch and squeeze

2010-10-26 Thread DrC
Bug-hunting at this level of detail is new to me, so forgive me if any of this is rubbish. It seems to me that: Debian 4.0 was broken in the sense that scripts edited by its version of nano could fail. It seems the backslash continuation line syntax was not preserved. This old version of nano c