Subject: Re: ImageMagick, libwmf, and xpm
To: John Klos <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/04/2005 15:35:47
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, John Klos wrote:
> I just noticed that ImageMagick now requires X11. Is this necessary? I
> don't remember it being required in the past.
> ImageMagick has as a dependency libwmf. libwmf includes
> ../../graphics/xpm/buildlink3.mk. xpm wasn't built or installed on my 2.0
> system when I installed ImageMagick, but on a 1.6.2 system, it gave
> security issues for xpm when it started trying to compile it.
> I've removed the ../../graphics/xpm/buildlink3.mk includes in libwmf, and
> it's built just fine. Since there are so many security problems with xpm,
> should I just commit the changes to libwmf?
That sounds fine to me.
It would be good to have xpm rewritten so it does not require any X
libraries. Anyone interested?
As for the security issues: It would be to fix xpm. I offered to do this
before by adding a package for the freedesktop.org libXpm. (And if that
freedesktop.org is not updated yet, I will commit changes there also.) (I
didn't check if Xaw-Xpm is fixed yet.)
Jeremy C. Reed
open source, Unix, *BSD, Linux training