Bug#1132795: Fwd: Bug#1132795: Drop “Resolution: (not specified) ” if no pHYs

[xiao sheng wen(肖盛文)]

Control: tags -1 upstream

My this first reply email is lost, I use my Debian email forward it again.



-------- 转发的消息 --------
主题: Re: Bug#1132795: Drop “Resolution: (not specified)” if no pHYs
日期: Wed, 3 Jun 2026 09:36:26 +0800
发件人: xiao sheng wen(肖盛文) <atzlinux at sina.com>
回复地址: 1132795 at bugs.debian.org
组织: https://www.atzlinux.com
收件人: Emma Müller <emma2 at ro.ru>, 1132795 at bugs.debian.org

Control: tags -1 upstream

Hi,

You reply my email to my personally email address only, please CC to 1132795 at bugs.debian.org too.

Debian bugreport is public:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1132795

every one can read and reply it.

在 2026/6/3 06:45, Emma Müller 写道:
> Hi Xiao!
> 
> Am 02.06.26 um 10:09 schrieb xiao sheng wen(肖盛文):
> 
>> Upstream first, do nice communicate to upstream author is better.
> 
> Yes. If you can think of a nice message to the author that would nudge him to do what he by default should stand up for (maintain the package), please do. As for me, given his derisive tone, I cannot come up even with a single word.
> 
>> Certainly, we are all volunteer in open source project, upstream author sometimes perhaps
>> wouldn't fix some bugs.
> 
> I appreciate your work and the work of the maintainers in general. If an upstream maintainer plainly rejects to fix a bug, it'd be unfortunate, but we're used to this, so we sigh and move on in the case of a polite and clear rejection.
> 
> At the same time, specifically in the case of this bug, something new and strange happened. Namely, the bug which has to be fixed was introduced by the AI in the first place, the upstream maintainer did not close the upstream bug report, and his comment was disrespectful/hostile towards us: as what he says about the package age and my non-contribution is already known, and what he says about Debian is wrong, his answer is, put politely, worse than a cynical smirk; such an unprofessional answer means that something went wrong with him. Further, the comment smells like being generated by AI (https://textguard.ai says 67%, and the upstream maintainer is deeply into AI according to his Web page). What puzzles me is whether there is any way to positively proceed from here apart from living with the bug. Is any fork/clone of pnginfo known?

The libpng-tools package has one command pngfix can do some png fix.
https://libpng.org/pub/png/libpng.html

pngchunks /usr/share/inkscape/themes/Minwaita-Inkscape/gtk-3.0/assets/bullet-symbolic.symbolic.png

This can get more detail info about png chunks.

> 
>> Debian bugreport is public, perhaps some people would contribute a patch.
> 
> I sincerely hope that you are right and that I'm wrong, but a typical user won't. (For example, for me, setting up a development environment (which I don't have installed currently on the production machine, and I have no usable spare machine), checking out the code, reading it and finding the culprit, changing the code, testing it, and pushing the changes might be a full-time job for a few full days, even if I had the rights to push to the repository.) Certain Linux nerds technically could this and do this sometimes, but many/most of us, including myself, are already overcommitted and have to take hard choices on which goals to remove from our huge todo lists for the next half a century …

I'm sorry for my English word.
I said the word "some people" who include the open source developer, not only normal end user.
 
The package pngtools is team maintainer by Debian photo team:
Debian PhotoTools Maintainers <pkg-phototools-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org>
https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=pkg-phototools-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org

The Debian bugreport of any package maintainer by Debian photo team also CC to this mailing lists.
Our team member will receive this bugreport.
https://salsa.debian.org/groups/debian-phototools-team/-/group_members

The issue on the upstream github, also is public.
https://github.com/mikalstill/pngtools/issues/37

If there one "open source developer" find these information and also has interest to fix this bug,
they will do it.


Good lucky!

-- 
肖盛文 xiao sheng wen -- Debian Developer(atzlinux)
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=atzlinux%40debian.org
GnuPG Public Key: 0x00186602339240CB
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x00186602339240CB.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 39307 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-phototools-devel/attachments/20260605/3d8a9e94/attachment-0001.asc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-phototools-devel/attachments/20260605/3d8a9e94/attachment-0001.sig>