#565498 djview4: broken PS output on it_IT platform

Package:
djview4
Source:
djview4
Description:
Viewer for the DjVu image format
Submitter:
oopla-pzp
Date:
2010-02-08 01:24:05 UTC
Severity:
important
#565498#5
Date:
2010-01-16 12:45:05 UTC
From:
To:
Package: djview4
Version: 4.3-4
Severity: important

Printing some file yields a ghostscript error

Error: /undefined in 0,000000
Operand stack:
   0   1122   3395
Execution stack:
   %interp_exit   .runexec2   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   2   %stopped_push   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   false   1   %stopped_push   1905   1   3   %oparray_pop   1904   1   3   %oparray_pop   1888   1   3   %oparray_pop   1771   1   3   %oparray_pop   --nostringval--   %errorexec_pop   .runexec2   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   --nostringval--   2   %stopped_push   --nostringval--
Dictionary stack:
   --dict:1152/1684(ro)(G)--   --dict:0/20(G)--   --dict:138/200(L)--
Current allocation mode is local
Last OS error: 2
GPL Ghostscript 8.62: Unrecoverable error, exit code 1

and it turns out the critical part in PS output is

0 0 moveto
/0 1122 3395 0,000000 0,600000 0,200000 c
/1 24 0 0,000000 0,600000 0,200000 c
/2 8 0 0,000000 0,600000 0,200000 c
..

whereas gs(1) seems to expect/accept the US '.' decimal point; actually the
temp fix is simply to open the files with

  LANG=C djview file.djvu

though I think it deserves an 'important' tag since printing a doc is a main
function and the LANG=C workaround cannot be used right away easily in all
situations a by normal users.

thanks

#565498#10
Date:
2010-02-08 01:19:11 UTC
From:
To:
I believe that this is fixed in more recent versions, including in
particular the version currently in unstable (4.5-5) and perhaps the
one currently in testing (4.5-3).  Could I trouble you to check?  (I
tried to check myself, but your report does not give sufficient detail
to allow the problem to be definitively replicated.)

#565498#15
Date:
2010-02-08 01:21:46 UTC
From:
To:
These bugs (#562156 and #565498) may be related; this email is simply
to note this in an easy-to-find way.