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

Bug#630044: transition: poppler 0.16



Hi,

Alle giovedì 30 giugno 2011, Michael Biebl ha scritto:
> Am 29.06.2011 19:11, schrieb Philipp Kern:
> > the only issue I see at the moment is this:
> > 
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 05:03:47PM +0200, Pino Toscano wrote:
> >> * python-poppler (poppler-glib)
> >> 
> >>     The (small) patch needed to compile with poppler 0.16 is not
> >>     compatible with poppler 0.12, so it cannot be uploaded right
> >>     now. Asked to provide a version in experimental compilable
> >>     with poppler 0.16, see #628047.
> > 
> > There's a claim at the LP bug[1] that the patch isn't suitable. 
> > From a casual look that comment seems wrong, but you can judge
> > this better than me.
> > 
> > If that's resolved I'm ok with you going ahead with this
> > transition.  Please ping me when it's uploaded, though, so that I
> > can take care of the binNMUs.
> > 
> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/poppler-python/+bug/696025
> 
> Jakub mentioned on irc that the patch in [1] is wrong.
> There's an alternate patch shipped in the fedora package.
> 
> I've attached this patch and hope the more python/poppler savvy
> people can take a look at it.

This new patch looks better indeed.
It breaks the API (*) though, but follows the upstream API change in 
poppler-glib.
I verified the four packages in archive using python-poppler:
  douf00
  gedit-latex-plugin
  gourmet
  pdfshuffler
and apparently none of them uses the get_text() function of a 
PopplerPage, so there is nothing that would get broken by this new 
poppler-python patch.

(*)
-PopplerPage.get_text(style, rect)
+PopplerPage.get_text()
+PopplerPage.get_selected_text(style, selection)

-- 
Pino Toscano

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: