2019-01-22 12:21 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: > On 1/22/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2019-01-22 12:04 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>> On 1/22/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> 2019-01-22 11:56 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>> On 1/22/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> 2019-01-22 11:38 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>> On 1/22/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> 2019-01-22 11:28 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>> On 1/22/19, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> 2019-01-15 13:17 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/15/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-01-15 12:53 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/15/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2019-01-15 10:23 GMT+01:00, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/15/19, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A user provided a real-life caf file ending with junk after >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chunk, QuickTime reads such files. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please comment, Carl Eugen >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NACK, there is data after junk bytes, which would get simply >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discarded with your patch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please elaborate: I don't think any data gets discarded >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of this patch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I told you already, hex edit size of data chunk to very big >>>>>>>>>>>>>> number >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> play file again. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But how does this change the output compared to my patch? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It does change, full length of audio is: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> MD5=5128bc2cd0e7b0560f15dd4c0546d1a0rate= 0.0kbits/s speed= >>>>>>>>>>>> 777x >>>>>>>>>>>> size= 0kB time=00:09:18.16 bitrate= 0.0kbits/s speed= >>>>>>>>>>>> 769x >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for the delay: >>>>>>>>>>> QuickTime Player only plays the file for ~6:20. >>>>>>>>>>> Playing the file longer would be an issue since atoms after the >>>>>>>>>>> data atom are allowed. >>>>>>>>>>> And most important: This is unrelated, my patch is about playing >>>>>>>>>>> a file that is supposed to be played but currently doesn't work. >>>>>>>>>>> If there is something else to be improved, it should be a >>>>>>>>>>> separate >>>>>>>>>>> patch. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please comment, Carl Eugen >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> You can not claim it fixes playback. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It does here: The file does not play without my patch, it plays >>>>>>>> (for the right duration) with my patch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Duration is not right at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Does QuickTime play the file longer for you than FFmpeg >>>>>> with my patch? >>>>>> Or do I misunderstand you? >>>>> >>>>> Correct duration is one I showed it here. >>>> >>>> No, the correct duration for the given file is ~6:20 as >>>> already explained. >>> >>> Nope, you are removing actual valid audio samples this way. >> >> But the caf structure claims that the discussed data are >> not valid audio samples but other caf atoms, since valid >> files exist that have atoms there, it is correct to skip the >> atoms if they cannot be detected, that is just how caf >> works. > > I'm not talking about CAF structure.
But the CAF structure is the relevant talking point for caf files, no? >> Is my explanation sufficient for you now? > > You still claim 2 things in your patch which are lie. So you claim I am a liar? Does that mean we can finally drop the CoC? Please elaborate, Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
