Bug 195994

Summary: writing (raw) PAM files with bytes_per_sample > 1 broken
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 Reporter: Morten Sylvest Olsen <mso>
Component: netpbmAssignee: Jindrich Novy <jnovy>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Ben Levenson <benl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 4.0CC: pknirsch, psplicha
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: RHBA-2006-0651 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-10-11 19:14:39 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 201655    

Description Morten Sylvest Olsen 2006-06-20 08:15:22 UTC 
Description of problem:


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. try to write a (raw) file with bytes_per_sample > 2
2. file is invalid
3.
  
Actual results:

invalid file of wrong size

Expected results:

a valid file...

Additional info:

The culprit is in lib/libpamwrite.c:

 switch(pamP->bytes_per_sample){
        case 1: format1BpsRow(pamP, tuplerow, outbuf, rowSizeP); break;
        case 2: format1BpsRow(pamP, tuplerow, outbuf, rowSizeP); break;
        case 3: format1BpsRow(pamP, tuplerow, outbuf, rowSizeP); break;
        case 4: format1BpsRow(pamP, tuplerow, outbuf, rowSizeP); break;

Which is obviously bogus.

This is fixed in version 1.33,  perhaps earlier, for fedora
Comment 1 Jindrich Novy 2006-06-27 08:44:31 UTC 
Confirmed that this bug is present in netpbm-10.25 (RHEL4) and is fixed rawhide.
Comment 9 Red Hat Bugzilla 2006-10-11 19:14:39 UTC 
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2006-0651.html