Debian Bug report logs - #1026789
Broken vf files in package?

Reply or subscribe to this bug.

Display info messages

Message #5 received at [email protected] (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Hilmar Preuße <[email protected]>

To: [email protected]

Subject: Broken vf files in package?

Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 08:03:37 +0100

Package: texlive-fonts-extra
Version: 2022.20221123-2
Severity: normal


This is a question, which came up, when working on #1026460.

Things are worse: file(1) /does/ have magic for "TeX virtual font data"
but is *that* weak (only 16 bit, 0xf7 0xca at the start of file) it gets
beaten by the pattern for the dreaded MS-DOS executables (which is plain
nightmare).

After some searching I found the parser for virtual font files in
texk/dvipsk/virtualfont.c starting at line 189. So I could harden the
magic at least a little bit by exploiting the command byte (243, 0xf3)
at offset 0xb the earliest.

Since I had to download the huge texlive-fonts-extra .deb to extract the
reproducer, this at least also brought more than 20k samples to verify
the result. Some .vf files fail the test, and I'd like to ask you
whether they are technically correct:

# From the texlive-bin sources (bullseye)

* texk/web2c/tests/badvpl.vpl (I assume that's not a bug)

# From texlive-fonts-extra_2022.20221123-2_all.deb:

*
/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/mathdesign/mdbch/mdbchbofc8t.vf
*
/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/mathdesign/mdbch/mdbchrofc8t.vf

They look fairly broken (error messages inside), perhaps they shouldn't
be there anyway?

*
/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/ebgaramond/EBGaramondInitials-tlf-ts1.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/gfsbodoni/gbodonio9a.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfoit0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfoit0700.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfost0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfost0700.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfotc0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfotc0700.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfott0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfott0700.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfovi0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfovi0700.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfovt0600.vf
* /usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/hfoldsty/hfovt0700.vf
*
/usr/share/texlive/texmf-dist/fonts/vf/public/libertinus-type1/LibertinusSerifInitials-Regular-tlf-ts1.vf

These are pretty small (88 octets at most, usually just 12) so still not
having them detected properly might not be the biggest loss. Are these
files technically OK?

Hilmar
--
sigfault

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.