On Tue, 17 Mar 2015, Adrian Conlon wrote:
I submitted a bug report + patch a week or so ago, and I was wondering
whether one of the committers could take a look and see whether it looks
OK or not.
https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57678
Are you sure the logic for when to switch from 19xx to 20xx is right? If
you could produce a test file and/or reference in the spec, that'd help!
I realise that it isn't a major bug, but I'm using this as "testing the
water" for making other bug fixes for HSMF. With that in mind, I'd
appreciate pointers as to making accepting my changes as painless as
possible for committers to take.
HSMF started life before Microsoft released the file format specs, and is
based around what we could figure out easily from hex dumps. It turns out
that we got some key parts back-t-front. As such, pretty much only
"variable length" properties are supported. While we do have some support
for fixed length properties now (which actually cover most of them), we
don't have a link between the properties in the propery table and their
variable length chunks with their values in.
What it really needs is someone to spend some time with the spec, work out
exactly how a variable length property in the properties chunk maps to a
value chunk, and code up some logic to do that. With that in place, we can
deprecate much of the current code driven by the value chunks, and replace
it with a "proper" way of going via the properties list. That will also
mean we can expose and use a lot more properties than we currently do, and
possibly also avoid some hacky things like parsing string message headers
to try to find dates
Nick
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
