Page MenuHomePhabricator

direct clone of a element not displayed
Closed, ResolvedPublicBUG REPORT


The Problem seems to be introduced on commons between 23. August 2020 and 14. November 2020.

It is related to the update of c-librsvg2.40.20 to c-librsvg2.40.21

Clones of elements (without group) are not rendered

Steps to Reproduce: (example with <use)

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<svg width="120" height="40" version="1.1" viewBox="0 0 120 40" xmlns="" xmlns:xlink="">
  <circle id="c" cx="40" cy="20" r="10" style="fill:#f00;stroke-width:0"/>
  <use id="b" transform="translate(20)" xlink:href="#c"/>
  <use id="a" transform="translate(20)" xlink:href="#b"/>

Actual Results: (example with <text)

Librsvg_bug_nested_use.svg.png (512×512 px, 4 KB)

Expected Results:

Librsvg_bug_nested_use_librsvg251.png (230×230 px, 1 KB)

It works with rust-librsvg2.48.9, see comons-talk as well as with c-librsvg2.40.20 (but not with c-librsvg2.40.21)
Update librsvg: T193352

Jan21: (Problem description)
Feb21: (discussion)

Nov20: (Version of 18:13, 14. Nov. 2020)
Jan21: (version of 15:43, 19. Jan. 2021 by JoKalliauer)

Reported upstream:

Event Timeline

JoKalliauer renamed this task from clone of a clone not displayed to direct clone of a clone not displayed.Mar 6 2021, 7:25 PM
JoKalliauer created this task.

Cannot reproduce locally with plain librsvg2-2.50.3 (which is way newer than the Debian packages on the Wikimedia servers).

Screenshot from 2021-03-06 22-10-19.png (836×937 px, 81 KB)

@Aklapper : The question was not if it was fixed upstream (the title might be missleading), the question was "Was there currently an librsvg-update on thumbor?"

As far as I know there was no librsvg-update in 2020, which makes the bug imho a bit strange.

20062.3.93 to 2.14.0T6976#94135
20162.XX to 2.40.16T65703#2434426
20192.40.16 to 2.40.20-3T68672#5109579
2.3.93till 2006T6976#94122
2.14.0since 2006-T6976#94135

The question was not if it was fixed upstream (the title might be missleading), the question was "Was there currently an librsvg-update on thumbor?"

Question where? I'm lost. If you refer to then upstream developers will not know if some random downstream users (Wikimedia) deployed any updates on their servers. (I myself don't know the answer to that question, sorry.)

Question where?

I meant the question in the description in the first line here.

Thanks for your answer.

Frederico confirmed in , that it is an librsvg2.40-issue. So I'm narrowing the issue and I puzzling what I'm missing why it was rendered correctly in August 2020, but not any more in November 2020, with the same librsvg-version. Since November the issue came up several times on commons (but imho not before), so that the bug was just overseen in August is imho unlikely.

I missed that there was an update before April 2020 to librsvg 2.40.21-0+deb9u1 2155 (on 78% of the servers?), see @Dzahn 's comment in T218828#7022133 and 2.40.21 is the newest 2.40.X version available (released Feb 2020, also 2.40.20 was the "last" version, and depreciated in 2017), so that sill cannot explain the difference, because the rendering-change happened imho after August 2020.

@Aklapper : Does show the current version of production/toolforge? (SVG-Checker renders the image this image in the description the same.)

The issue was that I assumed that would show the current version, however it seems we are currently using librsvg 2.40.21.

librsvg 2.40.20librsvg 2.40.21
Librsvg_bug_nested_use.png (220×220 px, 1 KB)
Librsvg_bug_nested_use.png (220×220 px, 879 B)

see T218828#7088941 and T218828#7088946

thumbor* and mwmaint* servers in production have: 2.40.21-0+deb9u1

regular mediawiki appservers and all other servers production have: 2.44.10-2.1

Can't speak for toolforge.

JoKalliauer renamed this task from direct clone of a clone not displayed to direct clone of a element not displayed.May 27 2021, 3:52 PM
JoKalliauer changed the task status from Open to Stalled.
JoKalliauer triaged this task as Low priority.
JoKalliauer updated the task description. (Show Details)

(a) Should this bug-report be merged into the older T270630
(b) should T270630 be merged into this bug-report since here it is imho a bit more detailed