Re: [POSSIBLE VIRUS:###] gl2ps bug?

[Michael Goffioul]

2011/9/16 Ben Abbott <address@hidden>:
>
> On Sep 15, 2011, at 9:02 PM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
>
>> On Sep 15, 2011, at 8:16 PM, Michael Godfrey wrote:
>>>> I looked quickly at this patch.  It seems to have many changes
>>>> whose effect is nothing. i.e. a line is replaced by an identical
>>>> line.   Is it possible that there was an error in building the
>>>> patch?  Some changes were also introduced, but it is hard to
>>>> isolate them from the "do nothing" changes.  In any case, it would
>>>> seem good to back it out until the problem can be isolated and a
>>>> patch which only makes changes can be generated.
>>
>> On 15 September 2011 19:59, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> I agree. There are a lot of changes that appear to be "do nothing".
>>> Does anyone know why "hg diff" is detecting a change where there
>>> appears to be none?
>>
>> It's whitespace. Do "hg diff -w" to omit whitespace changes.
>>
>> - Jordi G. H.
>
> Thanks Jordi.
>
> The part that is left is short enough that is should be possible to isolate 
> the problem.
>
> The announcement for Version 1.3.6 is below ...
>
>        http://www.geuz.org/pipermail/gl2ps-announce/2011/000019.html
>
> The pixel zoom for ps images looks like a good place to start.
>
> Ben

Ben,

There's something weird when I parse the logs for the file gl2ps.c
from the hgweb
interface. The change http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/7dedfd70dd9f
seems to add support for pixelzoom (claiming to pull changes from
gl2ps-1.3.5-svn),
but then the change http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/7b4ec6f841a2
seems to revert everything (claiming to sync with gl2ps-1.3.5).

Moreover, the announcement
http://www.geuz.org/pipermail/gl2ps-announce/2011/000019.html
indicates that the current gl2ps version is 1.3.6 (not 1.3.5). Is it
possible that you
accidentally removed support for pixelzoom, by syncing with the wrong
gl2ps version?

Michael.