Releases retrieved: 10.02.0 Upstream release that is considered latest: 10.02.0 Current version/release in rawhide: 10.01.2-3.fc39 URL: https://www.ghostscript.com Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/1157/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghostscript
Created attachment 1988638 [details] Update to 10.02.0 (#2238724)
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of ghostscript-10.02.0-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106129165
gs 10.02.0 upstreamed all patches which we used to carry. Upstreams builds it with jbig2dec 0.20 which was just released. Here is a copr build of jbig2dec 0.20, gs 10.02.0 and (everything?) which needs a rebuild: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mjg/jbig2dec/monitor/ Recall that jbig2dec does not do proper versioning but has its onw check, which necessitates a coordinated side-tag build of everything. Special note for gs 10.02.0: The Old PostScript based PDF interpreter has been removed, it is no longer available. Are we still using the old interpreter somewhere? I guess rawhide is the place to find out ... We have to face the future without it. Also, we might want to start building with tesseract/leptonica. Let me know your plans for ghostscript, and I'll coordinate the jbig2dec update.
On that occasion - do we want to add the ocr devices which have been around since 9.54? A local build with them works. (We build mupdf with ocr since mupdf-1.19.0-2.fc34.)
Could I please get some feedback regarding your plans with gs 10.02.0 and jbig2dec 0.20? We could think about packaging jbig2dec (e.g. introducing soname downstream and introducing legacy packages such as jib2dec0.19 or such) to break those ties, or bundling again, both of which seem to be ugly workarounds for upstream's development "style". Alternatively, I'll try and build mupdf etc with jbig2dec 0.19 (even though current releases suggest 0.20) and wait with jbig2dec 0.20 for gs to be ready. I just don't want to wait with *everything* for gs.
Releases retrieved: 10.02.1 Upstream release that is considered latest: 10.02.1 Current version/release in rawhide: 10.01.2-3.fc39 URL: https://www.ghostscript.com Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/ More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added upstream. Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/1157/ To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghostscript
Created attachment 1996616 [details] Update to 10.02.1 (#2238724)
the-new-hotness/release-monitoring.org's scratch build of ghostscript-10.02.1-1.fc38.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=108420838
(In reply to Upstream Release Monitoring from comment #6) > Releases retrieved: 10.02.1 > Upstream release that is considered latest: 10.02.1 > Current version/release in rawhide: 10.01.2-3.fc39 > URL: https://www.ghostscript.com > Based on the information from Anitya: https://release-monitoring.org/project/1157/ > To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghostscript FYI, 10.02.1 is a patch release to address some security bugs.
Sorry Michael, it have slipped my attention. I will rebase ghostscript so that it will build with tesseract/leptonica now. As for jbig2dec, 0.20 is now supported/shipped with gs so I think there is no need for that.
(In reply to Richard Lescak from comment #10) > Sorry Michael, it have slipped my attention. > > I will rebase ghostscript so that it will build with tesseract/leptonica now. > As for jbig2dec, 0.20 is now supported/shipped with gs so I think there is > no need for that. gs always shipped with jbig2dec and tons of other libs which we unbundle: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghostscript/blob/rawhide/f/ghostscript.spec#_241 ``` rm -rf cups/libs freetype ijs jbig2dec jpeg lcms2* leptonica libpng openjpeg tesseract tiff windows zlib ``` Are you saying that you intend to bundle jbig2dec now? The bundled jbig2dec version changed to 0.20, which is the version both ghostscript and mupdf upstream bundle currently, so that we (I) could update Fedora's jbig2dec to 0.20 and rebuild dependencies at their versions which require (or at least bundle) that jbig2dec version. I mean, if you bundle jbig2dec with ghostscript in Fedora it definitely makes my life easier. I just don't think we can justify that from the packaging guidelines (not until we go full flatpak...).
FEDORA-2023-1eb161dadc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-1eb161dadc
FEDORA-2023-fe0b3320f8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-fe0b3320f8
No, I mean that there is no need for legacy package or bundling jbig2dec with gs if I understand correctly. Ghostscript from now on will just require 'jbig2dec >= 0.19' in a same manner as a configure file is verifying the version. I will address tesseract later in another commit.
FEDORA-2023-34e8cac18a has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-34e8cac18a` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-34e8cac18a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-af39d2b2b4 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-af39d2b2b4` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-af39d2b2b4 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Please check on the status of your updates; they have been blocked due to failing tests for 4 weeks.
Thank you. Update will be pushed to stable soon. I'm sorry about the delay.
FEDORA-2023-34e8cac18a has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-af39d2b2b4 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.