Bug#732555: ghostscript: gs 9.05 doesn't handle slightly broken pdf file as well as gs 9.10

To: Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk>, <732555@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: Bug#732555: ghostscript: gs 9.05 doesn't handle slightly broken pdf file as well as gs 9.10
From: Sanjoy Mahajan <sanjoy@olin.edu>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 17:08:31 -0500
Message-id: <[🔎] 87haa5x15s.fsf@approx.mit.edu>
Reply-to: Sanjoy Mahajan <sanjoy@olin.edu>, 732555@bugs.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20131218194550.16546.62236@bastian.jones.dk>
References: <87vbymat7a.fsf@approx.mit.edu> <[🔎] 20131218194550.16546.62236@bastian.jones.dk>

Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> writes:

> Your own tests indicate that indeed a newer gs is a fix for this bug.
> Please, however, let's discuss only the actual bug in this bugreport.

Sure.  I just didn't want others to waste time trying to debug something
that has been fixed upstream.

> A separate bugreport - http://bugs.debian.org/723719 - tracks packaging 
> of newer upstream release.

I'll cross my fingers for a newer lcms2.

-Sanjoy

Reply to:

References:
- Bug#732555: ghostscript: gs 9.05 doesn't handle slightly broken pdf file as well as gs 9.10
  - From: Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk>

Prev by Date: Bug#732555: ghostscript: gs 9.05 doesn't handle slightly broken pdf file as well as gs 9.10
Next by Date: Processing of cups-filters_1.0.43-1_amd64.changes
Previous by thread: Bug#732555: ghostscript: gs 9.05 doesn't handle slightly broken pdf file as well as gs 9.10
Next by thread: Processing of cups-filters_1.0.43-1_amd64.changes
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread