search

mjg / mupdf-spec

mupdf packaging for Fedora
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mjg/mupdf-git
0 stars 0 forks source link

new version 1.14-rc1 #8

Closed ousia closed 5 years ago

ousia commented 6 years ago

@mjg,

version 1.13 has been released.

Just in case you might consider it, removing thirdparty/freeglut makes impossible to type non-ascii characters (#6).

Many thanks for your help.

mjg commented 6 years ago

Yes, that's what's in the copr build right now. Unfortunately, the bundled freeglut does not seem to compile quite right on architectures with different endianness: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27039450

This delays the push of 1.13.0, unfortunately. I'll have to dig further.

ousia commented 5 years ago

According to https://mupdf.com/release_history.html, mupdf-1.14.rc1 has been just released.

ousia commented 5 years ago

I forgot to mention, the build system seems to have been simplified:

Not sure whether this will improve packaging (I’m just ignorant on the details of these improvements).

mjg commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the ping. Alas, the build system changes break the package build for now. There are more fundamental changes than the ones outlined above, and they are not documented: the way in which thirdparty and system libraries are chosen is different now; builds seem to require mujs now (which is inherently unsafe); it builds two new libraries. Yes, I managed to build the beast meanwhile, but I have to make sure that this does not include unwanted bits.

ousia commented 5 years ago

Sorry to read that things are so different now.

I’m surprised also about mujs being inherently unsafe (it’s advertised as secure).

BTW, since mupdf-gl and mupdf-x11 have such a feature mismatch (with annotations), I wonder whether it would make sense not to build mupdf-x11 and link mupdf to mupdf-gl.

Just in case it helps.

mjg commented 5 years ago

mupdf-X11/gl still differ in key bindings, and the man page describes -X11. I don't mind using the "alternates" mechanism wher the user gets to decide which one is "mupdf", but I have to read up on how to package that.

As for "secure": I didn't mean to comment on the quality of mujs per se - it's just the notion of feeding scripts per PDF to an interpreter that runs on your machine that raises some alerts. It is not that different in ghostscript, where "SAFER" tries to distinguish between trusted and untrusted code. But I may be misreading the mujs scope completely. And we do ship the library in Fedora (just not a current version). copr test build for mupdf is coming today...

ousia commented 5 years ago

Many thanks for your explanation and for the test build coming today 👏.

BTW, wouldn’t it make sense to remove the mjg/mupdf-GL repository, since the mjg/mupdf repository includes both binaries?

mjg commented 5 years ago

It say "Starting with 1.11, builds off the official spec mjg/mupdf have the Open-GL based app so that this repo is obsoleted." in the mupdf-GL repo. I kept it for purposes of documentation/archival but don't mind removing it if it is confusing.

mjg commented 5 years ago

Builds looking OK so far.