On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:28:29 +0200, Philipp Kern wrote: > On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 10:36:08PM +0200, David Paleino wrote: > > today I received #601137 -- i.e. gThumb segfaults because of an unhandled > > situation of a missing Exif tag (the "orientation"). > > I could track it down, and made a patch [1] for it. > [...] > > [1]: > > http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/gthumb.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/14-safe_exif_read.patch;hb=refs/heads/exp/master > > Does this mean that it still crashes if any of the other attributes are not > present? In the context diff it looks like there could be more. Only the two that you can see in the diff. > That would seem like bad design to me... I could just check the other two too. However, I assume that at least image width and height are set by any camera -- that's why I didn't add the check to those as well, in first place. However, it's just an assumption, and I haven't googled for it. Also, for those attributes there's no reasonable default that could be set. Kindly, David -- . ''`. Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino : :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/ `. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://deb.li/dapal `- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature