On 10.6.2013 23:12, Jim wrote:
> I thought I saw discussion on the list about adding support for
> expanding wildcards on Windows. But I don't see it mentioned in the
> changelog. Was this done in this release for either flac.exe or
> metaflac.exe?
>
The feature is there for both of them.
>
>In the changelog I see up to 192 kHz ReplayGain support mentioned for
>flac.exe, but not for metaflac. Was it changed in one and not the other??
I really do not know. The discussion on metaflac and support for replay gain
for higher sample rates was back in February/March 2012
I thought I saw discussion on the list about adding support for
expanding wildcards on Windows. But I don't see it mentioned in the
changelog. Was this done in this release for either flac.exe or
metaflac.exe?
___
flac-dev mailing list
flac-dev@xiph.or
The changelog mentions 192kHz support for replay gain in metaflac, but metaflac
--help has the old description for --add-replay-gain with 48kHz max bit rate.
I also thought that the old restriction, where files processed had to have the
same bit rate, was removed?
Olav Sunde
__
Christoph Terasa wrote:
> On Unices or Linuxes building from git should be straightforward
> enough, or you wait until the distributions/package maintainers
> catch up.
Fedora, Gentoo and Arch Linux already have 1.3.0. For Debian (and its
derivatives, most notably Ubuntu), Fabian Greffrath
Christoph Terasa wrote:
> There are several links to Windows compiles in the Hydrogenaudio thread
> for FLAC 1.3.0 at
> http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=101082 .
>
> On Unices or Linuxes building from git should be straightforward enough,
> or you wait until the distribu
There are several links to Windows compiles in the Hydrogenaudio thread
for FLAC 1.3.0 at
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=101082 .
On Unices or Linuxes building from git should be straightforward enough,
or you wait until the distributions/package maintainers catch up.
As an ordinary user I would like to extend THANK YOU to all the programmers
involved in version 1.3.0. As someone who is not a programmer I am deeply
impressed by the skills and involvement I have witnessed since I subscribed to
this list in January 2012.
The last piece would be to have 1.3.0 b
