Re: Gnome Status Report

[Nathan Carl Summers <summersn cs byu edu>]

On Tue, 17 Mar 1998 raster@redhat.com wrote:

> On 17 Mar, Elliot Lee shouted:
> ->  
> ->  gnome-graphics:
> ->  	ee 8
> ->  		It's imlib's fault more than ee's, but it doesn't display
> ->  		some .xpm's (i.e. mc/icons/mail.xpm). Despite raster's 
> ->  		protests about how xpm's are broken, someone needs to look
> ->  		at the problem and fix it so ee can be a true xv replacement ;-)
> 
> actually xv screws up that xpm - it laods but looks like garbage.. :)
> this is a result of the ambigous nature of the XPM format... there is
> no single method of interpreting it. all methdos end up at dead ends
> int he end.. no one method is better than any other.

I always assume what libXpm does on a certain input to be the correct
thing to do -- except if it dumps core.

Having gotten some xv-related bug reports since becoming the maintainer of
the gimp xpm plugin, I can tell you for sure that xv's parser is quite
buggy (less so than ImageMagick's, though).  If we really want ee to be a
xv replacement, shouldn't it's parser be buggy as well?  :)

Rockwalrus