[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-devel-irc] IRC log for 2010-03-28

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Wed Mar 31 13:37:16 CEST 2010


On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:38:58AM +0000, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni <at> gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > both ffplay and ffmpeg can handle missing timestamps by just assuming
> > constant framerate. This works fine with when it actually is constant
> > framerate but with things like telecine or paff frame/field mixes it can
> > fail unless the container stores timestamps for each frame OR falls in the
> > 25% of h264 timestamp handling that was implemented.
> > I do not know how many of the real world h264 + audio files fall in the
> > category. But if i belive the reports ive seen at least h264 in matroska
> > does not fall in the implemented 25%.
> 
> Note that issue 807 (what I assume this thread is about) does not contain a
> single PAFF sample.
> 
> And I don't believe there is an open issue about matroska files containing PAFF
> (but I agree that the one sample I have only seems to be handled correctly).

the problem is matroska + h264 in general, its not needed to be PAFF
though that surely makes it worse


> 
> (So the question is: Which "reports" do you mean?)

there was someone who submited a patch to do some very broken timestamp
guessing in matroska*.c, this looked alot like an attempt to implement the
timestamp calculation we are missing just completly wrongly at the complete
wrong place.


[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20100331/190e721d/attachment.pgp>



More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list