Skip to content

ISO/IEC 19794-2:2005 Template IO#31

Open
fatboab wants to merge 26 commits into
image-to-template-testfrom
isotemplate-io
Open

ISO/IEC 19794-2:2005 Template IO#31
fatboab wants to merge 26 commits into
image-to-template-testfrom
isotemplate-io

Conversation

@fatboab

@fatboab fatboab commented Nov 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Import/Export methods for reading/writing ISO templates from SourceAFIS.

@fatboab

fatboab commented Nov 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Just realised we're not updating the template length in the file once we know it...

@fatboab

fatboab commented Nov 6, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Good to be merged now...

@andrew-farries

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The test TemplateIO_ISO19794_2_2005 fails on my machine with: Expected 6 Was 500. originalDpi's are different

It segfaults on @olane 's machine.

I'm on cygwin on Windows. @olane is on a mac.

@cjheppell

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FWIW, running this through gdb on OS X points to this on failure:

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[..] in TemplateIO_ISO19794_2_2005_Export [..] at Templates/TemplateIO.c:117
117         int16_t x = minutia->position.x;

Pointing to line 117 in TemplateIO.c as a possible issue?

@fatboab

fatboab commented Nov 8, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Oh FFS! Turns out that on cygwin at least, the Unity TEST_SETUP stuff wasn't being called, so the template that was being written to disk was bogus. It's now failing on the Import portion of the test...

@fatboab

fatboab commented Nov 11, 2015

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@andrew-farries @cjheppell so @david-connell and I have fixed it to run under cygwin and fixed the resulting memory leaks. With the memory leak stuff that @fffej did, we hope this means this is now good to be merged.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are we going to use const consistently? I'd have thought both should be const in this situation?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have no idea, we need to decide on a few things like that and then apply them to all the code in another branch I think...

@andrew-farries andrew-farries removed their assignment Sep 13, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants