9/23/2023 0 Comments Imagemagic copy image![]() ![]() ![]() Remember, all long name forms of percent escapes are handled in a is case Replace escape with empty string, and perhaps produce a warning.Search for setting as a free-form 'option'.Search for setting as a free-form 'artifact'.Search for setting as a free-form 'property'.If key is a special image 'attribute' name (see listĪbove) return the associated or calculated image attribute.If key contains a glob pattern (but no known prefix).This includes and calculations and or globs of those prefixes such Handle special prefixes such as 'artifact:' 'option:' 'exif:', or.Is looked for in the following order until the first match has been If you request a percent escape such as % the setting Use by various operators, but are set globally for use by a whole See Artifacts and Options below for details.Īlso operational (expert) settings that are saved for Use by various operators, or by the user for future use. These are various operational (expert) settings that are saved for These include: Labels, Captions, Comments. Saved with the image (especially in MIFF and PNG image file formats). These are stored as a table of free form strings, and are (if possible) Most specific percent escapes is to access this Width, height, depth, image type (colorspace), timing delays, andīackground color. Modified as part of normal image processing. These are directly involved with image data, and more commonly But in case anyone else has this problem, I'm answering the question (which I found when trying to research the identical problem on my machine.Such as EXIF: data, containing focal lengths, exposures, dates, and in It happens that I and OP are both using this outdated version of Ubuntu on some machine, and my recommendation to both of us is to upgrade. I haven't generated a bug report for this because it only applies to an outdated version of ImageMagic on an outdated version of Ubuntu (and possibly of Debian). But with the misplaced patch, this turns out to be incorrect unless a height is specified in the geometry, the label will not be generated. The instructions clearly indicate that a label: source does not require a -size (or -pointsize) parameter. This causes the check to fail if the image did not originally have a height, even though a correct height had been computed at that point. ![]() (This made no real difference, as far as I can see, but it was a bit disorganized, which is probably why it was subsequently fixed.) The result is that the added step 3a is inserted before the image's height has been copied from the computed height. Unfortunately, in the version to which to patch is applied, the above steps were in a different order, with the third step being intermingled with step 5. If the image dimensions are unusable, immediately fail. This avoids a possible Denial of Service attack when ImageMagick is being used on a web back-end (which is common). The security patch was intended to avoid step 6 if the resulting image size could not be used. make some other relevant settings to image parameters.if the image's pointsize was not specified, copy it from the computed pointsize.if the image's height was not specified, copy it from the computed height.if the image's width was not specified, copy it from the computed width.if the image's size or pointsize is not specified, work out the best fit.In essence, the logic of label.c is as follows: I can't tell if that was included in the 14-November-2016 security update to 8:6.7.7.10-6ubuntu3.2 or the 29-November-2016 security patch to 8:6.7.7.10-6ubuntu3.3 (or, at least, I didn't bother trying to figure it out, since it's not that important.) The patch was created as a backport of this security patch, but because of a reorganization of the logic in the file coders/label.c, the correction ended up being inserted in the wrong place. The problematic patch is Debian patch 0161-Do-not-ignore-SetImageBias-bias-value. It's a bug in the particular version of ImageMagick you are using, resulting from a incorrect backport of a bugfix patch. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |