Bug#1128501: glycin-image-rs and glycin-svg keep streams open longer than necessary, causing the inability to unmount a prior working directory

[Al Ma]

tag 1128501 - moreinfo
thanks

Hi Rene,

Am 20.02.26 um 17:29 schrieb Rene Engelhard:
> tag 1128501 + moreinfo
> reassign 1128501 glycin-loaders
> thanks
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Am 20.02.26 um 16:55 schrieb Al Ma:
>> Package: libreoffice-writer
>> Version: 4:25.2.3-2+deb13u3
> Uh, what?
???

>> Control: affects -1 glycin-loaders
>>
>> This misbehavior started after we updated glycin and GDK Pixbuf recently. 
> So it's a bug there? 

Spare me with questions on whose bug it is from a developer's viewpoint: package X, Y, or the interface between them. I'd have to look into the code (at least several full days, i.e., as for my time, never) to answer this. As for a dumb user's viewpoint, I've written this already.

> And why would anyone install unstables glygin/gd-pixbuf on stable anyway?

The upgrade enables eog to view JPEG2000, which was not the case previously.

>> As the user action was calling libreoffice on a DOCX document, I am filing this bug report against libreoffice-writer; the maintainer may reassign if necessary.
>>
> Just beause llibeoffice loads images? 

Spare me about “because”; I'd have to look into the code to answer this and tell you the reasons.

> I don't think so. (And even then writer is just writer, image loading probably is -core)
> 
> 
>> Reproduce:
>>
>> $ sshfs username at remote_host:/remote_directory ~/Remote
> 
> Oh, dear...

It's for both anonymity and clarity. There is really no need to mention real names of files, directories, and users here – specifically in this issue, real names are probably a pointless distraction.

> 
>> $ sudo dpkg -l libreoffice-writer libgdk-pixbuf-2.0-0 glycin-loaders
>> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
>> | Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig-aWait/Trig-pend
>> |/ Err?=(none)/Reinst-required (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
>> ||/ Name                      Version            Architecture Description
>> +++-=========================-==================-============-===========================================
>> ii  glycin-loaders            2.0.8-1            amd64 sandboxed image loaders for GNOME
>> ii  libgdk-pixbuf-2.0-0:amd64 2.44.5+dfsg-4      amd64        GDK Pixbuf library
>> ii  libreoffice-writer        4:25.2.3-2+deb13u3 amd64 office productivity suite -- word processor
> Why are you installing unstables glycin on stable?
>> Requested change: Close the streams to the current working directory when they are no longer required.
> 
> Rquested action: Don't install random packages from sid on stable and then blame stable.

I didn't “blame” stable (the tone of this word is an overstatement), and the upgraded (not just “installed”) packages are not random, but crucial to at least three other GNOME packages (eog, evince, and papers). This issue is likely to become an issue in testing, and then in stable in several months/years if not handled properly early enough, as keeping files open longer than necessary is serious (issuing an fclose() is simple, but determining when it's time to issue an fclose() may or may not be nontrivial). For the reasons I already stated, I submitted a bug report against libreoffice and stated explicitly that the maintainer may reassign (i.e., disagree). If you happen to be the maintainer, a disagreement is fine, and there is no need to be extra outraged.

> 
> In any case: Even if there was a bug in libreoffice noone will care about it in *stable* since the gdk-pixbuf there is not using glycin anyway.
One of the scenarios could be a so far unnoticed bug in the interface or the way libreoffice uses the interface.

> 
> If you insist that this is libreoffice at fault (which I don't think is) please at least try with testing or sids version.
> 
I insist on nothing, but it's at fault from a plain user's viewpoint (which I stay as long as I don't read the code) who simply started libreoffice. A maintainer may naturally disagree with the package assignment; a decision I don't have the slightest intent to contest now.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Rene
> 

I cleared the moreinfo tag; if the maintainers think that their question “Uh, what?” has not been addressed, I kindly ask them to restate it so that I could actually answer it.

Cheers,
Alma