(In reply to comment #15) > I'd say the change to Gfx.cc is ok, though i don't see the need for m1x and m1y >
m1x and m1y are needed to restore m1[4] and m1[5] in case of falling back to Gfx code when out->tilingPatternFill() returns false.
(In reply to comment #15)
> I'd say the change to Gfx.cc is ok, though i don't see the need for m1x and m1y
>
m1x and m1y are needed to restore m1[4] and m1[5] in case of falling back to Gfx code when out->tilingPatt ernFill( ) returns false.