From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <1331113827.3119.7.camel@rubik> From: Tim Waugh Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 09:50:27 +0000 In-Reply-To: <20120306.144653.295962394.sho@bbr.jp> References: <1330689855.32498.25.camel@rubik> <20120302.213857.23722135.sho@bbr.jp> <1330949378.9812.3.camel@rubik> <20120306.144653.295962394.sho@bbr.jp> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-2wEq8AtWHO2AQ4yl5F4v" Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Printing-architecture] XPdf bundling in pdftoopvp as well List-Id: Printing architecture under linux List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Koji Otani Cc: printing-architecture@lists.linux-foundation.org --=-2wEq8AtWHO2AQ4yl5F4v Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 14:46 +0900, Koji Otani wrote: > oprs/*Splash*.cxx are not copied from poppler while they use poppler data= . > There may have vulnerabilities, but it's not because of copying from > poppler. We should fix them in pdftoopvp. OK, that's good. I haven't audited them so I don't know whether they have any security issues. I just want to make sure that duplication from xpdf/poppler is kept to a minimum, or even avoided entirely. Tim. */ --=-2wEq8AtWHO2AQ4yl5F4v Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEVAwUAT1cvY+7Fkar03pQsAQIANgf/UInVWdL9ooWtuQXQm26n4Ht+qC9vQtWA g46tm2+jMrMoTbCp6Wrc2ZlDy8zQE6kKzEzEjWl1yMGux6U2nIOFmPhceJ38tgCO tPI18MLjiV9pGd7qQyLsEpKMvfzoEQFWT+2nvkAANHywvwDUt/0JsCcU5l06tcN1 6aMvtp5CaF9QfRB8BP0r6XObMF2Z/ZsmudV4vnglCYKKKnrKROOjM4/guSi3wG2q AdyLesg4425J1/Fr0fL/ByYajVvTLvr9hkpVaurtRN4kIkztUkWqAPsR08Y315yl zWAl/vQAijKpckuOV78kZvBWqUpIsG2vMLsnXgabI7EmV3K/ZivxvA== =9y/7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-2wEq8AtWHO2AQ4yl5F4v--