-
2009.10.28 10:50 "Re: [Tiff] Number of images in a multi-tiff file?", by Brad Hards
-
2009.10.28 16:22 "Re: [Tiff] Number of images in a multi-tiff file?", by Frank Warmerdam
-
2009.10.28 17:47 "Re: [Tiff] Number of images in a multi-tiff file?", by Mark Pereira
-
2009.10.29 17:43 "Re: [Tiff] Tiff Digest, Vol 65, Issue 9", by Richard Nolde
- 2009.10.28 17:46 "Re: [Tiff] extending tags in "a"ppend mode? - solved", by Juergen Buchmueller
- 2009.10.28 22:43 "[Tiff] Libtiff release soon, please advise", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2009.10.29 18:08 "Re: [Tiff] Tiff Digest, Vol 65, Issue 9", by Bob Friesenhahn
- 2009.10.29 18:21 "Re: [Tiff] Tiff Digest, Vol 65, Issue 9", by Toby Thain
-
2009.10.29 17:43 "Re: [Tiff] Tiff Digest, Vol 65, Issue 9", by Richard Nolde
-
2009.10.28 17:47 "Re: [Tiff] Number of images in a multi-tiff file?", by Mark Pereira
-
2009.10.28 16:22 "Re: [Tiff] Number of images in a multi-tiff file?", by Frank Warmerdam
2009.10.29 02:27 "Re: [Tiff] Libtiff release soon, please advise", by Edward Lam
I plan to cut new libtiff releases soon. While I don't intend to fix
all existing (or many) known bugs before those releases are cut (and there are many bugs listed in libtiff bugzilla), this would be a good
time to remind of any dire issues known to exist which should
> definitely be fixed before a libtiff release.
I only looked at what caught my eye on the list. Bug 2001 seems like important low hanging fruit to do before final release:
http://bugzilla.maptools.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2001
Basically, it is saying that we should be adding -fno-strict-aliasing to the gcc (3+?) compiler options when compiling with -O2. Probably none of libtiff was written with strict aliasing in mind? If so, it sounds like a good and easy thing to do for avoiding potential bad code generation.
Regards,
-Edward