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

Bug#548878: FTBFS texlive-bin won't compile against libpoppler >= 0.11



Package: texlive-bin
Version: 2007.dfsg.2-7
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
User: ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Usertags: origin-ubuntu karmic ubuntu-patch

texlive-bin won't compile against libpoppler 0.11 or later, attached is 
a couple of patches (one for libpoppler >= 0.11, and the other is for 
libpoppler 0.12) to fix the issues.

Please note that libpoppler 0.12 is currently in experimental.

*** /tmp/tmpTsYyNF
In Ubuntu, we've applied the attached patch to achieve the following:

  * debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.11: fix a FTBFS because of unuseful
    call to GfxFont destructor (virtual and protected) (LP: #383825)
  * debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.12: fix a FTBFS with libpoppler 0.12:
    use getPDFMinorVersion instead of getPDFVersion.

We thought you might be interested in doing the same. 


-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
  APT prefers karmic-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'karmic-updates'), (500, 'karmic-security'), (500, 'karmic-proposed'), (500, 'karmic-backports'), (500, 'karmic')
Architecture: i386 (i686)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.31-11-generic (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
diff -u texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/series texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/series
--- texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/series
+++ texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/series
@@ -63,0 +65,2 @@
+ubuntu_libpoppler-0.11
+ubuntu_libpoppler-0.12
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2.orig/debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.11
+++ texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.11
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+Fix a FTBFS with libpoppler 0.11: the destructor of GfxFont is virtual, and it doesn't make sense to call it.
+Index: texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc
+===================================================================
+--- texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2.orig/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc	2009-09-28 08:44:25.000000000 +0000
++++ texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc	2009-09-28 09:25:56.000000000 +0000
+@@ -633,7 +633,7 @@
+     }
+     for (r = encodingList; r != 0; r = n) {
+         n = r->next;
+-        delete r->font;
++//        delete r->font;
+         delete r;
+     }
+ }
only in patch2:
unchanged:
--- texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2.orig/debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.12
+++ texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/debian/patches/ubuntu_libpoppler-0.12
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+Fix a FTBFS with libpoppler 0.12: use getPDFMinorVersion instead of getPDFVersion
+Index: texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc
+===================================================================
+--- texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2.orig/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc	2009-09-28 10:25:18.000000000 +0000
++++ texlive-bin-2007.dfsg.2/build/source/texk/web2c/pdftexdir/pdftoepdf.cc	2009-09-28 10:59:33.000000000 +0000
+@@ -673,6 +673,7 @@
+     Page *page;
+     int rotate;
+     PDFRectangle *pagebox;
++    int minor_pdf_version_found, major_pdf_version_found;
+     float pdf_version_found, pdf_version_wanted;
+     // initialize
+     if (!isInit) {
+@@ -688,8 +689,11 @@
+     // this works only for PDF 1.x -- but since any versions of PDF newer
+     // than 1.x will not be backwards compatible to PDF 1.x, pdfTeX will
+     // then have to changed drastically anyway.
+-    pdf_version_found = pdf_doc->doc->getPDFVersion();
++    minor_pdf_version_found = pdf_doc->doc->getPDFMinorVersion();
++    major_pdf_version_found = pdf_doc->doc->getPDFMajorVersion();
++    pdf_version_found = major_pdf_version_found + (minor_pdf_version_found * 0.1);
+     pdf_version_wanted = 1 + (minor_pdf_version_wanted * 0.1);
++
+     if (pdf_version_found > pdf_version_wanted) {
+         char msg[] =
+             "PDF inclusion: found PDF version <%.1f>, but at most version <%.1f> allowed";

Reply to: