Thank you for your prompt and thoughtful response, Barak. When I submitted that bug report to the Debian list, I mistakenly assumed that the latest upstream was the latest djview4 tar file release, which has the older tiff2pdf.c, which does not have that problem. However, I see now that there is a much newer central git tree at https://sourceforge.net/p/djvu/djview-git/ci/master/tree/ and see that you are apparently actively involved with it. I confirm that I can reproduce the problem with the git master branch version of that code, so my belief that the bug was from a Debian packaging change was wrong.
As you recommended, I have submitted my bug report upstream. It should be accessible at https://sourceforge.net/p/djvu/patches/41/ . I submitted it as a "patch" because I include that proposed possible fix, but please let me know if you think I should resubmit it another way or change anything. Also, please feel free to close or otherwise change the status of my bug report on the Debian bug tracking system as you believe appropriate. Thanks for your help, and thanks for your work in packaging and maintaining such useful software as djview for so many people to use. Adam Adam On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 2:34 PM Barak A. Pearlmutter <ba...@pearlmutter.net> wrote: > > Thanks for your very thorough bug report. > > The changes to tiff2pdf.c in the Debian package are actually inherited > from upstream, because we're tracking upstream development as that's > the easiest way to deal with bugs etc, and upstream is very > cooperative. > > So I'd suggest filing this on upstream, because as you say, I'm not > sure it's a good idea for me to patch the Debian package with this > kind of might-break-something-else fix. > > Cheers, > > --Barak.
