[Openicc] compiz-cms/CompICC [was: What is exactly needed...]

[Max Derhak]

The ICC is working on providing tests for color management support.  Two
web pages have been created that test a browser.

 

They are:

http://www.color.org/browsertest.xalter

 

and

 

http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter

 

 

It would be very helpful if there was an open bug report with a proposed
patch.  I would believe that lcms2 should be able to fix both.

 

Max Derhak

Senior Software Architect

max.derhak at onyxgfx.com <mailto:max.derhak at onyxgfx.com> 

________________________________

From: openicc-bounces+max.derhak=onyxgfx.com at lists.freedesktop.org
[mailto:openicc-bounces+max.derhak=onyxgfx.com at lists.freedesktop.org] On
Behalf Of Hal V. Engel
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:07 PM
To: openicc at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Openicc] compiz-cms/CompICC [was: What is exactly
needed...]

 

On Tuesday, May 31, 2011 04:52:02 PM Graeme Gill wrote:

> Alastair M. Robinson wrote:

> > It's very useful if you want to use a LUT profile (say you want to
use

> > gamut-mapping on an LCD with poor blacks) but also want Firefox to
be

> > colour-managed.

> 

> I'm wondering what would happen if someone submitted a patch

> to Firefox that fixes their ICC problems by restoring lcms(2).

> 

> Is there any way of fighting the bogus claims that lcms is insecure ?

> 

> Graeme Gill.

 

If I remember correctly the supposed lcms security issue was the
original reason that was floated for not using lcms in firefox but later
there were claims that there were also performance issues with lcms. I
know on my system I didn't notice that the versions that used lcms were
slower than the subsequent versions that did not but perhaps this was
noticable on lower end machines.

 

I suspect that they would resist "regressing" back to using lcms. But
lcms2 is faster than lcms1 and the "security issue" in lcms1 was fixed
within hours of being reported and there are absolutely no reports of
the "security issue" being exploited. So it was more or less a
non-issue.

 

I don't think it would be difficult to write a patch to revert firefox
to lcms2. I think it would put a lot of pressure on them if they had an
open bug report about the problems with their internal CM stuff with a
patch that fixed it by using lcms2 to either accept the patch and revert
to lcms2 or actually fix their own code.

 

Hal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openicc/attachments/20110531/1f4b85aa/attachment.html>