Exiv2

11 Mar 2010

18:13 Exiv2 Forum: RE: The "volatile" Tags vs the "smart" Tags

Hi Steve, It seems to me this has more to do with the way the exiv2 utility is used rather than the tags themselves: > did an '-M"add..." modify' command to set this value the *add* command _adds_ a tag as opposed to the *set* command, w...

09 Mar 2010

05:20 Exiv2 Bug #684 (Resolved): Exif.Image.SubIFDs should support more than 4 sub-IFDs

07 Mar 2010

03:37 Exiv2 Forum: RE: Trap or suppress warnings when using Exiv2 library?

> Having looked at the issues listed above (but not the code) I've formulated a tentative plan to refine handling for errors and warnings. I would add virtual functions to the classes that produce errors and warnings that would be called to handle...

01:37 Exiv2 Forum: RE: Trap or suppress warnings when using Exiv2 library?

From the README: ...

05 Mar 2010

01:33 Exiv2 Patch #688: src/futils.cpp: incorrect check for linux version of strerror_r

Can you elaborate why that should be changed? According to the autoconf doc, STRERROR_R_CHAR_P may be set on 'many systems (including, for example, version 2.2.4 of the GNU C Library)' and the _GNU_SOURCE is needed according to the Debian bug ...

04 Mar 2010

20:13 Exiv2 Feature #686: LLVM clang: error: default initialization of an object of const type 'class Exiv2::...

Does the following code cause the same error (it works fine with g++)? ...

16:46 Exiv2 Feature #687: LLVM clang: warning: 'extern' variable has an initializer

Does the following code, taken from the C++ Standard ISO/IEC 14882:2003(E), section 3.1 Declarations and definitions, also produce a warning? ...

06:46 Exiv2 Revision 2035: #684: Extended SubIFD support to 9 SubIFDs.

#684: Extended SubIFD support to 9 SubIFDs.

05:34 Exiv2 Revision 2034: #684: Quickfix to prevent the assertion failure.

#684: Quickfix to prevent the assertion failure.

05:33 Exiv2 Bug #684: Exif.Image.SubIFDs should support more than 4 sub-IFDs

There are TIFFs with more than 4 sub-IFD pointers. Exiv2 currently chokes on the 5th (assertion failure). Originally reported by frith [dot] foottit [at] gmail [dot] com in "digiKam bug 210259":https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=210259#c19