On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Lukasz Marek wrote:
On 03.04.2016 21:37, Marton Balint wrote:
Insertion of silence was a bit broken since
df34b700981de606ca4847e1ed0bfdf9ac3e9104 because the info whether or not the
source buffer supposed to be silence must be kept between callbacks. Failing to
do so cause
On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 09:37:58PM +0200, Marton Balint wrote:
Insertion of silence was a bit broken since
df34b700981de606ca4847e1ed0bfdf9ac3e9104 because the info whether or not the
source buffer supposed to be silence must be kept between callba
On 03.04.2016 21:37, Marton Balint wrote:
> Insertion of silence was a bit broken since
> df34b700981de606ca4847e1ed0bfdf9ac3e9104 because the info whether or not the
> source buffer supposed to be silence must be kept between callbacks. Failing
> to
> do so causes rogue samples from the last buff
On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 09:37:58PM +0200, Marton Balint wrote:
> Insertion of silence was a bit broken since
> df34b700981de606ca4847e1ed0bfdf9ac3e9104 because the info whether or not the
> source buffer supposed to be silence must be kept between callbacks. Failing
> to
> do so causes rogue sampl
