Current master is failing build test on Ubuntu 18.0.4.5

[dgtlmoon]

Python3.6 on ubuntu here

git clone https://github.com/LeoHsiao1/pyexiv2.git
cd pyexiv2

cd pyexiv2/lib/
g++ exiv2api.cpp -o py36-linux/exiv2api.so -O3 -Wall -std=c++11 -shared -fPIC `python3 -m pybind11 --includes` -I /usr/include/exiv2 -I /usr/include/python3 -L ./lib -l exiv2
cd ../..
python3 setup.py install
pytest -v

pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_read_exif PASSED                                                                                                                                                          [  3%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_read_iptc PASSED                                                                                                                                                          [  7%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_read_xmp PASSED                                                                                                                                                           [ 11%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_read_raw_xmp FAILED                                                                                                                                                       [ 15%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_modify_exif PASSED                                                                                                                                                        [ 19%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_modify_iptc PASSED                                                                                                                                                        [ 23%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_modify_xmp PASSED                                                                                                                                                         [ 26%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_clear_exif PASSED                                                                                                                                                         [ 30%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_clear_iptc PASSED                                                                                                                                                         [ 34%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_clear_xmp PASSED                                                                                                                                                          [ 38%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_nonexistent_path PASSED                                                                                                                                                   [ 42%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_not_image_path PASSED                                                                                                                                                     [ 46%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_error_log PASSED                                                                                                                                                          [ 50%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_read_all FAILED                                                                                                                                              [ 53%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_modify_exif PASSED                                                                                                                                           [ 57%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_modify_iptc PASSED                                                                                                                                           [ 61%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_modify_xmp PASSED                                                                                                                                            [ 65%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_clear_all PASSED                                                                                                                                             [ 69%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_error_log PASSED                                                                                                                                             [ 73%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py::test_memory_leak_when_reading FAILED                                                                                                                                           [ 76%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py::test_memory_leak_when_writing PASSED                                                                                                                                           [ 80%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py::test_stack_overflow PASSED                                                                                                                                                     [ 84%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py::test_transmit_various_characters PASSED                                                                                                                                        [ 88%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf_on_ImageData.py::test_memory_leak_when_reading FAILED                                                                                                                              [ 92%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf_on_ImageData.py::test_memory_leak_when_writing PASSED                                                                                                                              [ 96%]
pyexiv2/tests/test_perf_on_ImageData.py::test_stack_overflow PASSED                                                                                                                                        [100%]

==================================================================================================== FAILURES ====================================================================================================
_______________________________________________________________________________________________ test_read_raw_xmp ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    @check_md5
    def test_read_raw_xmp():
        with Image(path) as img:
>           assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593
E           assert 4635 == 4593
E             +4635
E             -4593

pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py:28: AssertionError
_________________________________________________________________________________________________ test_read_all __________________________________________________________________________________________________

    @check_md5
    def test_read_all():
        with open(path, 'rb') as f:
            with ImageData(f.read()) as img:
                compare_dict(testdata.EXIF, img.read_exif())
                compare_dict(testdata.IPTC, img.read_iptc())
                compare_dict(testdata.XMP, img.read_xmp())
>               assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593
E               assert 4635 == 4593
E                 +4635
E                 -4593

pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py:12: AssertionError
_________________________________________________________________________________________ test_memory_leak_when_reading __________________________________________________________________________________________

    @check_md5
    def test_memory_leak_when_reading():
        p = psutil.Process(os.getpid())
        m0 = p.memory_info().rss
        for _ in range(1000):
            test_func.test_read_exif()
            test_func.test_read_iptc()
            test_func.test_read_xmp()
>           test_func.test_read_raw_xmp()

pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py:16: 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
pyexiv2/tests/base.py:37: in wrapper
    ret = func(*args, **kwargs)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

    @check_md5
    def test_read_raw_xmp():
        with Image(path) as img:
>           assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593
E           assert 4635 == 4593
E             +4635
E             -4593

pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py:28: AssertionError
_________________________________________________________________________________________ test_memory_leak_when_reading __________________________________________________________________________________________

    @check_md5
    def test_memory_leak_when_reading():
        p = psutil.Process(os.getpid())
        m0 = p.memory_info().rss
        for _ in range(1000):
>           test_func_on_ImageData.test_read_all()

pyexiv2/tests/test_perf_on_ImageData.py:13: 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 
pyexiv2/tests/base.py:37: in wrapper
    ret = func(*args, **kwargs)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

    @check_md5
    def test_read_all():
        with open(path, 'rb') as f:
            with ImageData(f.read()) as img:
                compare_dict(testdata.EXIF, img.read_exif())
                compare_dict(testdata.IPTC, img.read_iptc())
                compare_dict(testdata.XMP, img.read_xmp())
>               assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593
E               assert 4635 == 4593
E                 +4635
E                 -4593

pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py:12: AssertionError
============================================================================================ short test summary info =============================================================================================
FAILED pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py::test_read_raw_xmp - assert 4635 == 4593
FAILED pyexiv2/tests/test_func_on_ImageData.py::test_read_all - assert 4635 == 4593
FAILED pyexiv2/tests/test_perf.py::test_memory_leak_when_reading - assert 4635 == 4593
FAILED pyexiv2/tests/test_perf_on_ImageData.py::test_memory_leak_when_reading - assert 4635 == 4593
========================================================================================= 4 failed, 22 passed in 10.42s ==========================================================================================
d````

[LeoHsiao1]

These errors are due to the failure of the Test case test_read_raw_xmp(). The raw XMP length read is different than expected.

[LeoHsiao1]

I need to find out what's different.
Please manually read the raw XMP of the test image and copy it to this issue, including the space character.

$ cd pyexiv2/
$ ls pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg              # The test image is here
pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg

$ python3
Python 3.6.9 (default, Nov  7 2019, 10:44:02) 
[GCC 8.3.0] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import pyexiv2
>>> img = pyexiv2.Image('pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg')
>>> img.read_raw_xmp().encode()
b'<?xpacket begin="\xef\xbb\xbf" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> ...

[dgtlmoon]

Output attached.. lots of whitespace in the end (approximately 2050bytes of 0x20h)
output.txt

[LeoHsiao1]

I found that even the XMP ID was not what I expected. Please check if your test images have been modified. Whether the hash value is consistent with this:

$ md5sum pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg
81760130b2ed488646c2bf9fd485cb03  1.jpg

[dgtlmoon]

After test..

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ md5sum pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg
81760130b2ed488646c2bf9fd485cb03  pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg

After build

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ git status .
On branch master
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/master'.

Changes not staged for commit:
  (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed)
  (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory)

	modified:   pyexiv2/lib/py36-linux/exiv2api.so

repo reset..

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ git reset --hard
HEAD is now at 3b18062 Update the defect description
dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ md5sum pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg
81760130b2ed488646c2bf9fd485cb03  pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ ls -al pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg
-rw-rw-r-- 1 dgtlmoon dgtlmoon 18031 Dec 27 13:03 pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg

I just ran it a second time.. and i got a pass

After test..

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/x/pyexiv2$ md5sum pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg
81760130b2ed488646c2bf9fd485cb03  pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg

[dgtlmoon]

So on checkout master build and test it fails.. but sometimes on the second time it will pass

[LeoHsiao1]

The test case has been executed on multiple platforms:

      matrix:
        os: [ubuntu-18.04, macOS-latest, windows-2019]
        python-version: [3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9]

I haven't had this problem before. In a similar situation, Windows handles space characters differently than Linux.

[dgtlmoon]

Well.. it's still important to figure out why I think...

[dgtlmoon]

Can you explain this comment "Windows handles space characters differently than Linux."

What exactly, how exactly does this affect the tests? I'm not a mind reader :)

[LeoHsiao1]

For example, when Exiv2 outputs image metadata to a terminal on Windows, it shows the newline character as \r\n and the path separator as \.
However, pyexiv2 does not output data to the terminal, so it has not encountered this problem.

[LeoHsiao1]

The probability that Windows is related to your issue is too low to go into detail.

[dgtlmoon]

@LeoHsiao1 So what you are saying, if i understand your assumption correctly, is that you've written the tests in a way that they will only pass on windows? that's a horrible idea!

@check_md5
def test_read_raw_xmp():
    with Image(path) as img:
        assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593

so that 4593 will only work in windows ?!?!

[LeoHsiao1]

No, my test cases have been executed under 15 circumstances: https://github.com/LeoHsiao1/pyexiv2/actions/runs/448497877

      matrix:
        os: [ubuntu-18.04, macOS-latest, windows-2019]
        python-version: [3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9]

As you can see from the GitHub Actions page, most of the recent test results have passed.

[dgtlmoon]

According to the specifications, the whitespace padding is part of the XMP standard... so any change here means that something has changed and we need to know exactly what..

to set an arbitrary integer for comparison if your test passed without explanation or the original information on how you got that number is really not good enough for other programmers...

https://archimedespalimpsest.net/Documents/External/XMP/XMPSpecificationPart3.pdf

[dgtlmoon]

Can you paste in a hexdump of what you are seeing? I'm using..

@check_md5
def test_read_raw_xmp():
    with Image(path) as img:
        x= ":".join("{:02x}".format(ord(c)) for c in img.read_raw_xmp())
        print( x)
        assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593

[dgtlmoon]

Also... maybe the libexiv is different? which version are you running under Ubuntu 18?

$ dpkg -l|grep -i libexiv
ii  libexiv2-14:amd64                             0.25-3.1ubuntu0.18.04.5                           amd64        EXIF/IPTC/XMP metadata manipulation library
ii  libexiv2-dev                                  0.25-3.1ubuntu0.18.04.5                           amd64        EXIF/IPTC/XMP metadata manipulation library - development files

[dgtlmoon]

https://wwwimages2.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/xmp/pdfs/XMP%20SDK%20Release%20cc-2016-08/XMPSpecificationPart1.pdf

NOTE 3 When XMP is embedded within digital files, including white-space padding is sometimes helpful. Doing sofacilitates modification of the XMP packet in-place. The rest of the file is unaffected, which could eliminate a need to rewritethe entire file if the XMP changes in size. Appropriate padding is SPACE characters placed anywhere white space isallowed by the general XML syntax and XMP serialization rules, with a linefeed (U+000A) every 100 characters or so toimprove human display. The amount of padding is workflow-dependent; around 2000 bytes is often a reasonable amount.

So something is wrong... if that padding changes under any libexiv2 version and your library... we should know about it..

[LeoHsiao1]

Happy New Year!
I uploaded a file containing the expected RAW XMP.
raw_xmp.txt

Do you still have test_read_raw_xmp() fail?
The current version of Exiv2 I am using is 0.27.2.

[dgtlmoon]

My output in the text file..

@check_md5
def test_read_raw_xmp():
    with Image(path) as img:
        f = open("2.5-output.txt", "w")
        f.write(img.read_raw_xmp())
        f.close()
        assert len(img.read_raw_xmp()) == 4593

So here's what I have..

 <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55        ">

And what you have.....

 <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2">

Checking the result based on an integer of the total length is a horrible idea.. better is to hardcode what values in the XML (parse the XML in Python, it is easy) and check for the strings..

Here is the output of what I'm seeing.. hope it helps..

output.txt

[dgtlmoon]

Here's the story.. 4593 is written in your test, 4635 is what I get...

>>> 4635- 4593
42
>>> s='<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55        ">'
>>> len(s)
109
>>> 
>>> s='<x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2">'
>>> len(s)
67
>>> 109-67
42

[LeoHsiao1]

The actual value stored in the image is:

x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55        "

But after Exiv2 parses it, it returns:

x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2"

Maybe you're using a different version of Exiv2.

In summary, test_read_xmp() is used to check that the content of XMP are correct. test_read_raw_xmp() is just used to check that raw XMP can be read out, not to check the content.

[dgtlmoon]

@LeoHsiao1 You seem to be just repeating exactly what I'm writing :'(

[LeoHsiao1]

Well, on the one hand, I'll update the test case so that it can locate the differences.
On the other hand, your test case test_read_raw_xmp() didn't pass, is it because you're using version 0.25 of Exiv2 ?

[dgtlmoon]

That's right... that's what I said :) but... how do we know it's because of 0.25 and not 0.26.4 etc?

[dgtlmoon]

I need to find out where "Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124" is coming from exactly in my system, because I'm on Ubuntu 18 also.. @LeoHsiao1 i'm on ubuntu buster (18.04)

$ cat /etc/debian_version 
buster/sid

dgtlmoon@acer:/tmp/pyexiv2$ lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID:	Ubuntu
Description:	Ubuntu 18.04.5 LTS
Release:	18.04
Codename:	bionic

[LeoHsiao1]

Test cases always pass on Ubuntu 18.04 . See Github Actions
And my WSL is also Ubuntu 18.04 :

leo@Leo:~$ cat /etc/lsb-release
DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu
DISTRIB_RELEASE=18.04
DISTRIB_CODENAME=bionic
DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS"

[dgtlmoon]

@LeoHsiao1 I know this, you already said that.. that comment does not add much

But I'm running 18.04.5.... i think it is important that this passes (I'm repeating myself too on this point).. otherwise other programmers cannot test/build locally and will waste hours of their life (like I have already) trying to figure out what is wrong

[dgtlmoon]

So it works on

DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 18.04.2 LTS" (you)

but not

DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 18.04.5 LTS" (me)

.... not good enough I think..

[dgtlmoon]

I dont have "Adobe XMP Core" installed on my machine.. which is what is in the original test image (1.jpg).. And maybe "Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55" is not installed on the github actions test machine..

so there for the test is false-positive ?

[dgtlmoon]

_______________________________________________________________________________ test_read_raw_xmp ________________________________________________________________________________

    @check_md5
    def test_read_raw_xmp():
        with Image(test_img) as img:
>           diff_text(reference_data.RAW_XMP, img.read_raw_xmp())

pyexiv2/tests/test_func.py:28: 
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 

text1 = '<?xpacket begin="\ufeff" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-...                                                                                                   <?xpacket end="w"?>'
text2 = '<?xpacket begin="\ufeff" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core ...                                                                                                   <?xpacket end="w"?>'

    def diff_text(text1: (str, bytes), text2: (str, bytes)):
        max_len = max(len(text1), len(text2))
        for i in range(max_len):
>           assert text1[i:i+1] == text2[i:i+1], "The two text is different at index {} :\n< {}\n> {}".format(i, text1[i:i+10], text2[i:i+10])
E           AssertionError: The two text is different at index 97 :
E           < XMP Core 4
E           > Adobe XMP

pyexiv2/tests/base.py:46: AssertionError

I dont understand why the EXIF4 header is being re-written.. I think you have not helped to find out the real cause of the problem

[dgtlmoon]

I'm going crazy here, it's like i say something, and then you just repeat what I've already said and we go back to the start :(

[dgtlmoon]

When I look at tmp.jpg I can see that still says "Adobe XMP".. (the original test file 1.jpg)

but in the test output, it fails... that is the problem

[LeoHsiao1]

I think the problem is very simple:

1. Your test case reads raw XMP differently.
2. I found that the MD5 value of test image was not changed, but Exiv2 returned raw XMP incorrectly.
3. We need to find out the cause of this problem. In the meantime, I've made the test cases more rigorous.

[LeoHsiao1]

If you've been using different versions of EXIV2, how do you find out what's causing the problem?

That's right... that's what I said :) but... how do we know it's because of 0.25 and not 0.26.4 etc?

[dgtlmoon]

In your RAW_XMP you are looking for XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2, but in the YOUR image (.jpg), you have..

root@acer:/tmp/pyexiv2# exiftool ./pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg |grep Toolki
XMP Toolkit                     : Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55

Proof...

@check_md5
def test_read_raw_xmp():

    import subprocess
    import time
    output = subprocess.check_output("/usr/bin/exiftool {}|grep -i 'xmp toolkit'".format(test_img), shell=True)
    print("Looking at {}, I see {} ---->".format(test_img, output))  
    time.sleep(1) # so we dont fork to background and possibily overwrite it
    with Image(test_img) as img:
        diff_text(reference_data.RAW_XMP, img.read_raw_xmp())

text1 = '<?xpacket begin="\ufeff" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-...                                                                                                   <?xpacket end="w"?>'
text2 = '<?xpacket begin="\ufeff" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core ...                                                                                                   <?xpacket end="w"?>'

    def diff_text(text1: (str, bytes), text2: (str, bytes)):
        max_len = max(len(text1), len(text2))
        for i in range(max_len):
>           assert text1[i:i+1] == text2[i:i+1], "The two text is different at index {} :\n< {}\n> {}".format(i, text1[i:i+10], text2[i:i+10])
E           AssertionError: The two text is different at index 97 :
E           < XMP Core 4
E           > Adobe XMP

pyexiv2/tests/base.py:46: AssertionError
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Captured stdout call ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking at /tmp/pyexiv2/pyexiv2/tests/test.jpg, I see b'XMP Toolkit                     : Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55\n' ---->

This test will only pass if something horrible is wrong

[dgtlmoon]

I found that the MD5 value of test image was not changed, but Exiv2 returned raw XMP incorrectly.

OK.. getting somewhere... but I think your test is weird (#41 (comment))

[dgtlmoon]

Please change RAW_XMP in reference_data.py to be the same as what is in 1.jpg

$ strings ./pyexiv2/tests/1.jpg |grep Adobe
" id="W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d"?> <x:xmpmeta xmlns:x="adobe:ns:meta/" x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55        ">

It is wrong and should not beXMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2

[dgtlmoon]

You will need to include the whitespace padding in that change btw..

[LeoHsiao1]

I've included whitespace in reference_data.py without ignoring any characters.

Finally, you see the key problem. Exiv2 returns x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2". I haven't investigated the cause of it.
#41 (comment)

[dgtlmoon]

OK - do you agree to this

@check_md5
def test_read_raw_xmp():
    with Image(test_img) as img:
        f = open("test_read_raw_xmp.txt", "w+")
        f.write(img.read_raw_xmp())
        diff_text(reference_data.RAW_XMP, img.read_raw_xmp())

I see in test_read_raw_xmp.txt

Ubuntu 18.0.4.5 (me) - x:xmptk="Adobe XMP Core 5.6-c128 79.159124, 2016/03/18-14:01:55 "> (same as in image)
Ubuntu 18.0.4.2 (you) - x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2 "> (something else)

Can you confirm yes/no that you see this in your test_read_raw_xmp.txt ?

[LeoHsiao1]

Yeah, that's what I got with exiv2 : x:xmptk="XMP Core 4.4.0-Exiv2"
So I use it as a reference output for test cases.

[dgtlmoon]

@LeoHsiao1 OK, maybe nice idea is to include the output of img.read_raw_xmp() in the debug test verbose output, so then we can see how it looks in github actions too..

[dgtlmoon]

Something in your setup is weird, if what you're saying is true..

The current version of Exiv2 I am using is 0.27.2.
Ubuntu 18.0.4.2 (you)

because the current 18.0.4 LTS package should be 0.25-3

https://ubuntu.pkgs.org/18.04/ubuntu-main-amd64/libexiv2-14_0.25-3.1_amd64.deb.html

are you running something weird like testing ?

[dgtlmoon]

How do you have 0.27 ?

[LeoHsiao1]

Well.
According to the document pyexiv2/lib, you should download the distribution of Exiv2 from the website.

Download the release version of Exiv2, unpack it.
  - Linux64 : <https://www.exiv2.org/archive.html>

[dgtlmoon]

This project gets more insane,

Your perspective "We tested for ubuntu 18.04 but using a version of the library that is not shipped lib 18.04"

fuck man :/ sorry, this is just completely insane

[dgtlmoon]

I cant contribute here anymore, it's just too insane

[dgtlmoon]

Is there a reason why you insist on a version of a library that is not shipped with that distribution? I bet you did not bother to document that reason?

[LeoHsiao1]

Of course, I am using the latest version as possible.

• Version 0.25.3 of Exiv2 was released in 2016.
• Version 0.27.2 of Exiv2 was released in 2019.
• Version 0.27.3 of Exiv2 was released in 2020.

So your thoughts are strange: Why did you stick with the old version 4 years ago?

This statement is false: a version of a library that is not shipped with that distribution
Pkgs.org does not include Exiv2 0.27 because no one updated the release package above, not because Exiv2 0.27 does not support Ubuntu 18.04.

Anyway, when you download a software, you always look to see if the package exists on Pkgs.org, rather than the official website of the software?
That idea is crazy! Pkgs.org doesn't update packages very often, they are just volunteers.

If you are a beginner, I suggest you download general software in these ways:

• Download the compiled package from the software's official website or from the Ubuntu Archive
• Download the source package from the software's official website and compile it yourself.

[LeoHsiao1]

By the way, the CI process of Exiv2 is running on ubuntu18.0.4.
If you build from the source package, you can execute Exiv2 on a lower version of Ubuntu.

[dgtlmoon]

USE THE ACTUAL LIBRARY THAT IS SHIPPED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION

THIS STOPS YOU FROM HAVING TO MANUALLY UPGRADE THE LIBRARY WHEN THERE IS A SECURITY ISSUE FOUND!

THIS IS THE WHOLE REASON FOR USING THE ACTUAL LIBRARY THAT IS SHIPPED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION !!

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH USING AN "OLDER" VERSION IF IT STILL FUNCTIONS FINE!

it's all about managing the risks, you cannot expect the site owner to check his exiv version for updates/security issues every night

this is insane!

[LeoHsiao1]

1. In your opinion, the older the software, the more secure it is.
   So why are you using ubuntu18.04, not Ubuntu 14.04, Ubuntu 4.04 ?

2. In your opinion, ubuntu18.04 is not safe to use exiv2 0.27.2. However, exiv2 does not officially say this and has been using ubuntu18.04 as the CI environment. Your opinion is not reasonable.

[LeoHsiao1]

To make matters worse: Exiv2 fixes a number of problems with each version update: https://www.exiv2.org/changelog.html
If you use an older version, you can be attacked with a known defect. Surprise!

[LeoHsiao1]

I just released v2.4.1 , which adds APIs for handling Comment embedded in images.
Although the API was implemented two weeks ago, I spent the rest of the time adding APIs for handling ICC, improving test cases, and improving the Workflow scripts.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically closed because there has been no activity for a month.