| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Two more places where we were using the r_ptr macro to cast a PostScript
ref object into a structure without thoroughly checking that the object
was in fact a structure of the correct type.
One case did a partial check, but this is more robust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Although zparse_dsc_comments() does check the types of its operands, it
wasn't checking the return value from dict_find_string properly. It was
effectively assuming that the dictionary parameter was the *correct*
dictionary and would contain the key/value pair it needed.
Here we check to see if the key has not been found and throw an error
if so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Also update copyright dates.
Remove gs_cmdl.ps as we no longer use it, and remove its entry from
psfiles.htm.
Remove xfonts.htm as this feature (xfont support) is long, long gone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Commit 06d283c4a20fe7ec727bebb56404242734ea2d70 checked the number of
operands, but this is a better fix, since it also correctly checks the
type of the dictionary operand, which the previous fix didn't do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Bug 697800 "Null pointer dereference in zparse_dsc_comments()"
The custom operator .parse_dsc_comments wasn't checking the number of
operands supplied, before attempting to validate them. If not enough
were supplied it ended up falling off the bottom of the operand stack.
Generate a stackunderflow error when this happens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Bug #697190 ".initialize_dsc_parser doesn't validate the parameter is a dict type before using it."
Regardless of any security implications, its simply wrong for a PostScript
operator not to validate its parameter(s).
No differences expected.
|
|
Squashed into one commit (see branch for details of the evolution of the
branch).
This brings gpcl6 and gxps into the Ghostscript build system, and a shared
set of graphics library object files for all the interpreters.
Also, brings the same configuration options to the pcl and xps products as we
have for Ghostscript.
|