Description of problem: Certain postscript files when included in tex documents cause invalid PDF filename errors when running dvipdfm on the dvi file : bremen{schrett}1002: dvipdfm dewet dewet.dvi -> dewet.pdf [1(./fig4.ps<PS>)][2(./becker.ps<PS>)(./sharma1.ps<PS>)(./sharma2.ps<PS>)(./sharma3.ps<PS>)(./sharma4.ps<PS>)(./green.ps<PS>)][3(./fig4.ps<PS>)(./fig5.ps<PS>)][4(./acheson.ps<PS>)][5(./wetting.ps<PS>)][6(./up.ps<PS>Invalid PDF name "#16" pdf_new_name: invalid PDF name Output file removed. A good description is located at : http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org/msg87663.html I've attached the postscript file so you can test with it. A very simple patch is below as well. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): tetex-3.0-32.fc6 How reproducible: Every time Steps to Reproduce: 1.Create a tex document with a certain ps file. \documentclass{seminar} \input epsf.sty \begin{document} \setlength{\epsfxsize}{3.5in}\epsfbox{up.ps} \end{document} 2.latex the document 3.run dvipdfm on the result Actual results: bremen{schrett}1012: dvipdfm demo demo.dvi -> demo.pdf [1(./up.ps<PS>Invalid PDF name "#16" pdf_new_name: invalid PDF name Output file removed. Expected results: roma{schrett}1048: dvipdfm demo demo.dvi -> demo.pdf [1(./up.ps<PS>)] 158194 bytes written Additional info: Simple patch is attached...
Created attachment 147812 [details] Postscript file which causes error under dvipdfm
Created attachment 147813 [details] Patch to fix
Fedora apologizes that these issues have not been resolved yet. We're sorry it's taken so long for your bug to be properly triaged and acted on. We appreciate the time you took to report this issue and want to make sure no important bugs slip through the cracks. If you're currently running a version of Fedora Core between 1 and 6, please note that Fedora no longer maintains these releases. We strongly encourage you to upgrade to a current Fedora release. In order to refocus our efforts as a project we are flagging all of the open bugs for releases which are no longer maintained and closing them. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle/EOL If this bug is still open against Fedora Core 1 through 6, thirty days from now, it will be closed 'WONTFIX'. If you can reporduce this bug in the latest Fedora version, please change to the respective version. If you are unable to do this, please add a comment to this bug requesting the change. Thanks for your help, and we apologize again that we haven't handled these issues to this point. The process we are following is outlined here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/F9CleanUp We will be following the process here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping to ensure this doesn't happen again. And if you'd like to join the bug triage team to help make things better, check out http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
Bug re-verified for Fedora 8. The patch included in this report still fixes the problem if applied to current sources.
Applied. It will occur in the next tetex update. Thanks.
tetex-3.0-44.9.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8
tetex-3.0-44.9.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update tetex'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/FEDORA-2008-3158
This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 8. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '8'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 8 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-01-07. Fedora 8 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.