Bug 62181

Summary:	pnmflip segfaulting when using the -r90 -180 -r270 options
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Public Beta	Reporter:	Jef Spaleta <jspaleta>
Component:	netpbm	Assignee:	Phil Knirsch <pknirsch>
Status:	CLOSED RAWHIDE	QA Contact:	Ben Levenson <benl>
Severity:	low	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	skipjack-beta1	CC:	billc, rvokal
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2002-04-02 16:10:45 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:	61901

Description Jef Spaleta 2002-03-28 07:18:51 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 Galeon/1.2.0 (X11; Linux i686; U;) Gecko/20020314

Description of problem:
the pnmflip command is not behaving properly when using the rotate switches -r90
-r180 -r270, the -lr -tb switchs seems to work fine

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


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. pick your favorite jpg image
2. jpegtopnm whatever.jpg |pnmflip -r90 > whatever.pnm
3. the pnmflip process segfaults
	

Actual Results:  pnmflip errors out with a segfault

Expected Results:  pnmflip should have created a resultant pnm file rotated
according to the -r switch used.  this use to work. I have a program called
Gallery installed that makes use of pnmflip for image manipulations via the web.
 Old versions of the netpbm-prog package worked just fine.

Additional info:

No useful error messages just a segfualt statement

Comment 1 Phil Knirsch 2002-03-28 16:44:12 UTC

*** Bug 62204 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Bill Crawford 2002-03-29 03:45:42 UTC

I saw this problem ages ago, when playing around with vidwhacker.  Rebuilding
the package from the source RPM fixed it (with gcc 3 installed) and does so
now.  I think this is a miscompilation problem with gcc 2.96.

Comment 3 Phil Knirsch 2002-04-09 14:36:10 UTC

OK, this is sort of a compiler optimizer bug. I've fixed it now in the source
and even optimized the whole thing by doing so. :-)

Will suggest this fix to the maintainer of the netpbm package upstream.

Read ya, Phil

Comment 4 Bill Crawford 2002-04-09 20:53:09 UTC

The source was valid though, if a little ugly :o)
Should I go log this against gcc or has that been done internally?