| <<<Back 1 day (to 2020/04/22) | Fwd 1 day (to 2020/04/24) >>> | 20200423 |
emfipp | can ghostscript fix pdfs such as this one > https://dl.acm.org/doi/book/10.5555/578789 (click on "PDF" for the file) ? none of pdfium/pdf.js/xpdf3 can open it | 01:49.17 |
| also xpdf4.02 | 01:49.40 |
| microsoft reader can open the file yet it reports errors | 01:50.17 |
| update: microsoft reader actually opened *another* file | 05:53.37 |
| so none of those can open the file thus far | 05:53.44 |
chrisl | emfipp: Ghostscript does "fix" PDF's at all. It tried to be tolerant of broken and out of spec files but, by their nature, they may not be readable at all, or may not produce the intended output. *If* Ghostscript can read such a broken PDF, it *may* then be able to output a new PDF | 06:31.19 |
| FWIW, I don't actually see any reader having a problem with the main linked PDF on that page | 06:31.59 |
emfipp | chrisl: I think I'm 80% certain that it's an incomplete file. I'm gonna redownload and try again on the morrow | 07:03.14 |
kens | incomplete download is what ator and sebras are concluding over in #mupdf | 07:03.36 |
chrisl | The copy I have here goes all way the way to the %%EOF string | 07:05.44 |
| Hh, I just realised how bad my typing was earlier.... corrected post: | 07:31.39 |
| Ghostscript doesn't "fix" PDF's at all. It tries to be tolerant of broken and out of spec files but, by their nature, they may not be readable at all, or may not produce the intended output. *If* Ghostscript can read such a broken PDF, it *may* then be able to output a new PDF from that input. | 07:32.15 |
Shailender | Hello all. Good day to you. A quick query about Ghostscript license. I am working on developing an internal tool for parsing PDF data. This tool is not sold to anyone. Can I use AGPL and free version of the Ghostscript license ? OR, do I have to purchase a Commercial license ? Thank you very much. Regards, Shailender. | 08:55.08 |
chrisl | Shailender: I suggest you read the AGPL license, and if you cannot satisfy yourself of the conditions, take legal advice. We're just developers here, not lawyers..... | 08:58.06 |
Shailender | Thank you very much. | 08:58.42 |
chrisl | However, in general, if it is genuinely internal use only (not distributed, and not providing any externally visible service) you will *probably* be fine. | 08:59.40 |
| Of course, there is only tech support at our discretion | 09:00.27 |
Robin_Watts_ | Shailender: Yeah, the crucial (and oft misunderstood) bit about what chrisl said is that with the license we use (the GNU AGPL rather than the more usual GNU GPL), "distribution" is a wider thing. | 09:11.20 |
| With the GPL "distribution" means "giving someone else a copy to run". | 09:11.41 |
| With the AGPL "distribution" means "either giving someone else a copy to run, OR having the code embedded as part of software on a server that people can access, perhaps over the web". | 09:12.29 |
| So the AGPL prohibits certain sorts of working that are fine under the GPL. | 09:12.51 |
Shailender | Very much appreciate both your time and support. Thank you both. | 09:15.10 |
| <<<Back 1 day (to 2020/04/22) | Forward 1 day (to 2020/04/24)>>> | |