Looks like we might need some fixes in the utility functions. 
Let me know if you disagree.

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Pavan Kulkarni <pavanvkbgm@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jan, All
Pardon me for the naive question. 
I see that most functions in exif-utils.c (such as exif_get_short() ) are of type uintxx_t but they actually return value of type intxx_t (the mentioned function internally calls exif_get_sshort) 
Will this not cause undefined behavior? 
For the problem I described, I suspect this to be an issue. 
Any inputs will be much appreciated. 


On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Jan Patera <patera@pictview.com> wrote:

looks like you have a 64bit build? If so, could you please provide me your
JPG file?
libexif has not been tested well on 64 bit platforms yet.

 --- Jan

> On further debugging, found that I'm getting an invalid tag from the raw
> IFD data.
> I think it is expected to get this tag EXIF_TAG_EXIF_IFD_POINTER (0x8769)
> .. But I'm actually getting (0xFFFFFFFFFFFF8769) which messes up the whole
> tag extraction and gives an unknown tag which is negative -30871
> Does anyone have any clue about this problem...
> Strangely, it works fine on my linux machine.
> Regards,
> Pavan
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats.
> http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/_______________________________________________
> libexif-devel mailing list
> libexif-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libexif-devel