[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#987566: ghostscript: PDF Interpreter error on armel



Quoting Guilhem Bonnefille (2021-04-28 23:05:16)
> Le mer. 28 avr. 2021 à 09:24, Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> a 
> écrit :
> >
> > A key piece is missing, however: Please provide a sample file which 
> > - like you describe - succeeds to be processed by Ghostscript on 
> > i686 and armel/stretch but fails on armel/buster.
> 
> Here it is (attached).

Thanks!


> > Would also be helpful if you could check that same file can be 
> > succesfully parsed by other PostScript parsers - e.g. Evince, xpdf, 
> > and (if you have access to that) Adobe applications.
> 
> Yes it is. The *funny* part is that this file is generated by gs 
> itself as it is a step in the processing of the CUPS PDF pipeline: the 
> file is the output from *topdf (here, pstopdf).

Ghostscript might not fully _generate_ but only _adapt_ PostScript data, 
e.g. e.g. identify and (re)wrap EPS and TrueType objects that might be 
broken internally.


> Do you think it is possible to imagine a backport? The newest version 
> of ghostscript (in testing) is working even on armel.

Debian might officially fix this issue, and release to stretch the same 
as now with a minimal patch.  Obviously that requires figuring out what 
the actual cause of the issue is, and produce a working patch.

You might try "backporting" as you suggest - i.e. recompiling a newer 
package in a buster or stretch environment.

You might try persuade someone in Debian to issue a semi-official 
backport at https://backports.debian.org/

A 3rd option (or 4th, depending on how you count) is to try grab an 
intermediary release that might work with buster or stretch, from 
https://snapshot.debian.org/ - doing that and reporting back here which 
versions work and which doesn't would also be helpful in narrowing down 
what might be the cause for the issue.


> My hardware is quite exotic and only Debian stable is supported (for 
> kernel). But I was able to test with a debian chroot.
> 
> I'm starting to evaluate the rebuild of a more recent version of the 
> package, by myself, but I'm not so comfortable with Debian packaging 
> tools and I don't know where to start from (debuild, or pdebuild, or 
> cowbuild) in order to keep my system clear enough.

If you are comfortable using irc, you might try ask questions about 
build environment in the #packaging channel on OFTC.net


Kind regards,

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature


Reply to: