Hi, 2016-04-27 23:58 GMT+02:00 Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceho...@ag.or.at>: > Mark Thompson <sw <at> jkqxz.net> writes: > >> Unless someone can show what created this file and that >> it might make more, I suggest that the hack workaround >> should be removed. > > Is there a valid file affected by the applied patch? > It is very important that FFmpeg also decodes invalid > files as long as no valid files are affected.
The file is invalid in the sense that someone didn't remove an encapsulation (*) from another protocol layer (ie did a very bad job), not because of a somewhat known implementation bug due to misreading some specs (like we have for avi, mpeg-4 part 2, and already hevc, etc). I wonder, for instance, if I stream copy that sequence into another container, would the issue remain, and thus require the bugfix to be copied yet somewhere else? You even think so: > This is of course assuming that the file was not created > for the sole purpose to produce such changes in FFmpeg. i.e., is there a software/application that needs this, or is it just someone that expected dumping the stream to work while debugging/implementing something entirely different? In the end, if that was not that rare, I wonder if that wouldn't be the job of a bitstream filter. (*) although we probably support some strange things iirc, like DTS-IN-WAV-IN-AVI. -- Christophe _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
