On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 01:42:00PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 28/06/15 1:21 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 04:54:02PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > >> Le decadi 10 messidor, an CCXXIII, Carl Eugen Hoyos a écrit : > >>> From a very quick look, the new code seems mostly > >>> unreviewed > >> > >> What makes you say that? Where did you give your "very quick look" exactly? > >> > >>> Do you disagree? > >> > > > >> I do disagree, on several counts. First, the old muxer was based on > >> reverse-engineering, the new one is based on the spec; > > > > this may be true for the original demuxer 15 years ago, (iam not > > its author so iam not the right one to ask about it) > > > > but work was done on it since then > > not sure when the specs where first released, there are btw multiple > > versions of the specs > > I assume this one > https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=14995 > published three years ago. >
> Does the new demuxer introduce serious regressions? Does it make any file > play worse? when trying it on 2 random files i had locally yesterday it segfaulted on the first and i couldnt seek in the 2nd with it also as already mentioned it requires odd (that is likely wrong) reference checksums for fate to pass and andreas reported segfaults too. [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Let us carefully observe those good qualities wherein our enemies excel us and endeavor to excel them, by avoiding what is faulty, and imitating what is excellent in them. -- Plutarch
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
