Chris Travers wrote:
If TexLive had been around in 2002 and was statically linking to zlib,
it would have been affected too. TeX does not link against zlib but
LaTeX and XeTeX do.
Similarly, arbitrary code execution vulnerabilities have been found in
2005 in libjpeg (also linked to by LaTeX
Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
Chris, these statements have to be wrong, at least in part :
if TeX does not link against Zlib, then neither does LaTeX --
they are one and the same engine. -- ditto -- LibJpeg.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa :
C:\Program Files\Microsoft.NET\
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd)
wrote:
>
>
> Chris Travers wrote:
>
>> If TexLive had been around in 2002 and was statically linking to zlib,
>> it would have been affected too. TeX does not link against zlib but
>> LaTeX and XeTeX do.
>>
>> Similarly, arbitrary
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 09:30:29PM +0100, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd)
wrote:
> And to which "package management" suite would you suggest they delegate
> when offering TeX Live for Windows ?
Perhaps there's not even need to change the package management texlive has.
I do not know much about
2011/10/21 Chris Travers :
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Peter Dyballa wrote:
>>
>> Am 20.10.2011 um 16:54 schrieb Chris Travers:
>>
>>> One of the other commentors talks about documents that don't render on
>>> all versions of TexLive. If a client of mine is depending on this
>>> working, u
On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:36 PM, Ross Moore wrote:
> Hi Herb,
>
> On 21/10/2011, at 6:47 AM, Herbert Schulz wrote:
>
>>> If TexLive had been around in 2002 and was statically linking to zlib,
>>> it would have been affected too. TeX does not link against zlib but
>>> LaTeX and XeTeX do.
>>> ...
>>
Am 21.10.2011 um 00:51 schrieb Chris Travers:
> I'm not the one mixing things up. What I am saying is perhaps a bit
> different. If you are tying the .sty upgrades to binary upgrades,
> then an upgrade in a binary requires .sty upgrades, and these can
> break document generation systems.
Neith
Am 21.10.2011 um 01:42 schrieb Chris Travers:
> At the time a large portion of the industry was writing software
> statically linked against zlib
I think it wasn't zlib, it was versions of zlib, presumingly dozens.
>
> If TexLive had been around in 2002 and was statically linking to zlib,
> it
Am 21.10.2011 um 09:40 schrieb Chris Travers:
> Am I reading this wrong?
No, but you you're choosing the wrong candidates, those from the old and
smelling Linux packages.
--
Greetings
Pete
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night, but set a man on fire and
he'll be warm for the re
2011/10/21 Chris Travers :
> If TexLive had been around in 2002 and was statically linking to zlib,
> it would have been affected too.
It was and it was and it was. :-(
So it was till we dropped libtiff from pdfTeX and till we dropped xpdf
from XeTeX and LuaTeX (pdfTeX still uses it).
Best
Ma
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> If you wish to do it on the fly in XeTeX, you can write a TECkit map.
I do have a map now. Can someone tell me how to do the conversion "on
the fly" in XeLaTeX? I did see the command line option
"-translate-file=TCXNAME", but for that it sa
2011/10/22 Daniel Greenhoe :
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Zdenek Wagner
> wrote:
>> If you wish to do it on the fly in XeTeX, you can write a TECkit map.
>
> I do have a map now. Can someone tell me how to do the conversion "on
> the fly" in XeLaTeX? I did see the command line option
> "-t
12 matches
Mail list logo
