png problems on powerpc and s390 (was: Bug#322821: libpng12-0: new version breaks pdflatex)

[Frank Küster]

The gimp is currently broken as well. It can't save PNG images.
libpng error: Call to NULL write function

I had that problem with imagemagick's convert(1) and gimp as well. But
again? That's odd as 1.2.8rel-1.0.1 fixed that for me, and it works in
1.2.8rel-2 as well. Works in -4 as well, which one do you have
installed?
Maybe there's some unintentional ABI change because some padding in the
png structures was different/wrong?

It seems as if this problem might not be powerpc-specific, but also
occur on s390:

,---- http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=quagga&ver=0.99.1-6&arch=s390&stamp=1127770198&file=log&as=raw
| /usr/bin/make -C doc quagga.pdf
| make[1]: Entering directory `/build/buildd/quagga-0.99.1/doc'
| convert fig-normal-processing.png "fig-normal-processing.eps"
| epstopdf --outfile="fig-normal-processing.pdf" fig-normal-processing.eps
| Unrecoverable error: typecheck in .getdeviceparams
| Operand stack:
| false --nostringval-- InputAttributes --nostringval-- 0 --nostringval-- PageSize --nostringval-- -2048 --nostringval-- --nostringval--
| make[1]: *** [fig-normal-processing.pdf] Broken pipe
`----

Exactly the same error as in the corresponding powerpc log.

Regards, Frank

[Albert Cahalan]

Post by Frank Küster

The gimp is currently broken as well. It can't save PNG images.
libpng error: Call to NULL write function

I had that problem with imagemagick's convert(1) and gimp as well. But
again? That's odd as 1.2.8rel-1.0.1 fixed that for me, and it works in
1.2.8rel-2 as well. Works in -4 as well, which one do you have
installed?
Maybe there's some unintentional ABI change because some padding in the
png structures was different/wrong?

It seems as if this problem might not be powerpc-specific, but also

Being from EBCDIC land, s390 probably also has an unsigned char by default.
(dang this is dumb - all Linux ports should use the same default)

There's also endianness, but that would affect many more architectures.

Alignment seems to be the same between ppc and i386. (not that I would
know or care about bitfields)

[Lennart Sorensen]

Post by Albert Cahalan
Being from EBCDIC land, s390 probably also has an unsigned char by default.
(dang this is dumb - all Linux ports should use the same default)

arm also uses unsigned char by default. I have had to fix a few things
because of that too.

Post by Albert Cahalan
There's also endianness, but that would affect many more architectures.
Alignment seems to be the same between ppc and i386. (not that I would
know or care about bitfields)

Len Sorensen

[Christoph Hellwig]

Post by Albert Cahalan
Alignment seems to be the same between ppc and i386. (not that I would
know or care about bitfields)

alignment for 64bit integer types is not the same for i386 vs everything
else.

[Frank Küster]

Hi Ryan, hi s390 people,

Well, I think it's clear: We need a binary-only upload of tetex-bin.
I've never done that on one of the developer machines; is there any DD
on the powerpc list who is willing to save me from learning ;-)?

Yeah, but why did this happen in the first place? Broken buildd? Also,
what about s390? (And why are they no longer on the CC list?)

To summarize: Lots of packages depending on libpng12-0 had problems on
powerpc and s390 recently; for some of them (e.g. gimp) they seem to be
solved now (with the NMU'ed version 1.2.8rel-1.0.1), but for some, at
least tetex-bin, problems have actually started with that version.
Recompiling the packages against the new version helps, and I'm looking
for someone to make bin-NMUs of tetex-bin. gs-gpl still seems to be
affected, too
(cf.
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=quagga&ver=0.99.1-6&arch=s390&stamp=1127770198&file=log&as=raw
for s390, on powerpc it seems to be solved with gs-gpl_8.15-4 - compare
the last two builds on http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=powerpc&pkg=quagga).

However, I want to make you, Ryan, aware of the problem; perhaps it's
only in the past and fixed now, but maybe not.

Regards, Frank

[Michel Dänzer]

Post by Frank Küster

Well, I think it's clear: We need a binary-only upload of tetex-bin.
I've never done that on one of the developer machines; is there any DD
on the powerpc list who is willing to save me from learning ;-)?

Yeah, but why did this happen in the first place? Broken buildd? Also,
what about s390? (And why are they no longer on the CC list?)

To summarize: Lots of packages depending on libpng12-0 had problems on
powerpc and s390 recently; for some of them (e.g. gimp) they seem to be
solved now (with the NMU'ed version 1.2.8rel-1.0.1), but for some, at
least tetex-bin, problems have actually started with that version.
Recompiling the packages against the new version helps, and I'm looking
for someone to make bin-NMUs of tetex-bin. gs-gpl still seems to be
affected, too
(cf.
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=quagga&ver=0.99.1-6&arch=s390&stamp=1127770198&file=log&as=raw
for s390, on powerpc it seems to be solved with gs-gpl_8.15-4 - compare
the last two builds on http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=powerpc&pkg=quagga).

I don't really like the idea of bin-NMUing all those packages without
understanding the cause. If it turns out to be a real bug somewhere that
needs fixing, the whole bin-NMU dance will have to be done all over
again.

[Frank Küster]

Post by Michel Dänzer

Post by Frank Küster
To summarize: Lots of packages depending on libpng12-0 had problems on
powerpc and s390 recently; for some of them (e.g. gimp) they seem to be
solved now (with the NMU'ed version 1.2.8rel-1.0.1), but for some, at
least tetex-bin, problems have actually started with that version.
Recompiling the packages against the new version helps, and I'm looking
for someone to make bin-NMUs of tetex-bin. gs-gpl still seems to be
affected, too
(cf.
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=quagga&ver=0.99.1-6&arch=s390&stamp=1127770198&file=log&as=raw
for s390, on powerpc it seems to be solved with gs-gpl_8.15-4 - compare
the last two builds on http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=powerpc&pkg=quagga).

I don't really like the idea of bin-NMUing all those packages without
understanding the cause. If it turns out to be a real bug somewhere that
needs fixing, the whole bin-NMU dance will have to be done all over
again.

Me neither, but I am not qualified to find out the cause. Josselin
(libpng maintainer, again in the Cc) already said he had no idea either,
except toolchain changes on the affected arches. Maybe Ryan has some
insight as buildd admin?

Regards, Frank

[Albert Cahalan]

Post by Frank Küster

Post by Michel Dänzer
I don't really like the idea of bin-NMUing all those packages without
understanding the cause. If it turns out to be a real bug somewhere that
needs fixing, the whole bin-NMU dance will have to be done all over
again.

Me neither, but I am not qualified to find out the cause. Josselin
(libpng maintainer, again in the Cc) already said he had no idea either,
except toolchain changes on the affected arches. Maybe Ryan has some
insight as buildd admin?

The obvious assumption would be that we've gone through an
unintended ABI change. That's very bad. Oh well. It happened.
Let's put it behind us. Life goes on.

Not that the cause wouldn't be interesting of course.

[Frank Küster]

Post by Albert Cahalan

Post by Frank Küster

Post by Michel Dänzer
I don't really like the idea of bin-NMUing all those packages without
understanding the cause. If it turns out to be a real bug somewhere that
needs fixing, the whole bin-NMU dance will have to be done all over
again.

Me neither, but I am not qualified to find out the cause. Josselin
(libpng maintainer, again in the Cc) already said he had no idea either,
except toolchain changes on the affected arches. Maybe Ryan has some
insight as buildd admin?

The obvious assumption would be that we've gone through an
unintended ABI change. That's very bad. Oh well. It happened.
Let's put it behind us. Life goes on.
Not that the cause wouldn't be interesting of course.

More than interesting: If it wasn't an unintended ABI change, as
Josselin asserted, then what else was it? Will that "else" occur again?
How can it be prevented?

Regards, Frank

[Gerhard Tonn]

Post by Frank Küster
Hi Ryan, hi s390 people,

Well, I think it's clear: We need a binary-only upload of tetex-bin.
I've never done that on one of the developer machines; is there any DD
on the powerpc list who is willing to save me from learning ;-)?

Yeah, but why did this happen in the first place? Broken buildd? Also,
what about s390? (And why are they no longer on the CC list?)

To summarize: Lots of packages depending on libpng12-0 had problems on
powerpc and s390 recently; for some of them (e.g. gimp) they seem to be
solved now (with the NMU'ed version 1.2.8rel-1.0.1), but for some, at
least tetex-bin, problems have actually started with that version.
Recompiling the packages against the new version helps, and I'm looking
for someone to make bin-NMUs of tetex-bin. gs-gpl still seems to be
affected, too
(cf.
http://buildd.debian.org/fetch.php?&pkg=quagga&ver=0.99.1-6&arch=s390&stamp=1127770198&file=log&as=raw
for s390, on powerpc it seems to be solved with gs-gpl_8.15-4 - compare
the last two builds on http://buildd.debian.org/build.php?arch=powerpc&pkg=quagga).
However, I want to make you, Ryan, aware of the problem; perhaps it's
only in the past and fixed now, but maybe not.

I have uploaded a binary NMU of tetex-bin for s390. The gs-gpl bug is
still open, but I am looking into it.

Gerhard