<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - pdfinfo/pdffonts cannot process >2GB files" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44085#c14">Comment # 14</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - pdfinfo/pdffonts cannot process >2GB files" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44085">bug 44085</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:ajohnson@redneon.com" title="Adrian Johnson <ajohnson@redneon.com>"> Adrian Johnson</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=44085#c13">comment #13</a>) > But now that i think the pdf spec has a "Implementation Limits" section and > it mentions all the time that 32bit is the expected platorm and thus stuff > is not expected to be bigger than that. That was not the way I interpreted the Implementation Limits section. The limits are the minimum for a 32-bit platform. 64-bit machines are now becoming common and the limits would be expected to be higher. I also did not see anything suggesting that the file size should be limited to the Integer size, particularly as it mentioned the maximum file size is 10GB (for standard XRef tables) or unlimited (for XRef streams). > Does Adobe actually work with such big files? Should we strive to support > them if Adobe does not? I tested with a 3.5Gb and 5GB pdf. Adobe Reader 9.5.1 on Linux will open the 3.5GB file but fails to open the 5GB. Adobe Reader 11.0.0 on Windows will open both. However since files > 2GB are rare and there are a lot of changes required to make poppler handle large files it may be better to hold off supporting large files until we see more demand for this feature. We should add a check for >2GB files and print a more user friendly error message than "stream not seekable".</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>