trufanov added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D8415#162014, @aacid wrote: > In https://phabricator.kde.org/D8415#160837, @trufanov wrote: > > > In https://phabricator.kde.org/D8415#159049, @aacid wrote: > > > > > Please consider fixing this in Qt before asking us to create a workaround. > > > > > > I'm fine with workarounded gwenview as well as working GIMP and ImageMagick. > > > Is this your way of saying "i'm not interested in pursuing a fix in Qt"? I would be honered to commit a fix into Qt framework (never did yet). I'm also happy to commit something into KDE. But in my opinion it's most probably a libpng problem. And if I suggest a workaround to Qt team they'll answer me "Please consider fixing this in libpng before asking us to create a workaround." So I have to investigate libpng beforehand. I don't know png format specifications at all. And don't want to. That'll take time to investigate and a weeks of discussion with responsible teams. And then I'll face with one of 3 options: 1. I need to add a warning level in binary "error/everything is ok" communication between Qt and libpng. And adjust Qt's images format plugin system. That would be best one. 2. It's indeed a libpng-only problem. And they may return no error in such cases. (And they can argue that this is by design, by png standard or breaks binary compatibility). 3. Most probable option - it's acdsee app problem. Perhaps, only N-years old acdsee version problem. Which is proprietary software and both Qt and libpng will ignore it. So, I just have no time for digging into this further. I have an app. I've got user feedback that some png images do not open. Got an example. I was surprised to find that some opensource Qt apps could open it and some could not and leveraged with this to fix my app. I'm fine. And I just wanted to share my findings in case they could be useful. So it just a bit less than feasible for me to keen digging into this, (Btw, the proposed patch is that I find out from just a gwenview, I've not checked why particular GIMP and ImageMagick has no such problem. The reason may be different.) I would summarise this as following. This could be marked as WONT_FIX. My users are quite a specific guys which scan books and conservative enough to use weird software and its versions for years (or perhaps a decade) following manuals and trying to keep quality. If I'll face with file that is created by modern software I would be more keen to fix it. REPOSITORY R223 Okular REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D8415 To: trufanov, ngraham, #okular Cc: aacid, progwolff
