On Dec 05 20:16:47, [email protected] wrote: > This is 1.3.1 on OpenBSD/amd64. > The --no-utf8-convert option of metaflac(1) does not work for me: > > $ metaflac --no-utf8-convert --set-tag="Artist=Žoužlíček" aladin.flac > aladin.flac: ERROR: tag value for 'Artist' is not valid UTF-8 > (You probably can't see the Czech letters properly in my mail, > but that's beside the point.) > > Indeed, it is not valid UTF8 (it's LATIN2), but isn't metaflac > supposed to just write it as specified, with this option?
On Dec 06 09:54:55, [email protected] wrote: > The problem seems to be in > src/metaflac/operations_shorthand_vorbiscomment.c > in the set_vc_field() function. > > It does check whether utf conversion is required, > > /* move 'data' into 'converted', converting to UTF-8 if necessary */ > if(raw) { > converted = data; > } > } > but later checks that FLAC__format_vorbiscomment_entry_is_legal() > whether or not we are utf converting; and this function, defined > in ./src/libFLAC/format.c, ultimately calls for utf8len_(s) no matter what. > So my LATIN2 text fails to be legal, because it's not legal UTF > -- which, indeed, it isn't. On Dec 06 12:33:35, [email protected] wrote: > METADATA_BLOCK_VORBIS_COMMENT is defined at: > https://xiph.org/flac/format.html#metadata_block_vorbis_comment > and VorbisComments at: > http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/v-comment.html > > Note that a VorbisComment is defined as > being UTF-8, although metaflac --no-utf8-convert > doesn't seem to be behaving as advertised. Reading the above links, the Vorbis Comment is defined to be UTF8. What is the purpose of --no-utf8-convert in setting tags then? To specifically ask for invalid files? Maybe I am misunderstanding the meaning of --no-utf8-convert. Perhaps the current behaviour is intended, and --no-utf8-convert just means "don't bother converting, it is already UTF8". Which my example isn't, and metaflac rightfully complains. Can anybody please shed some light on this? > Finally, Jan might have more luck taking his > problem with metatflac over to the flac-dev list. On Dec 06 13:55:16, [email protected] wrote: > Even better, he could submit a bug report at: > http://sourceforge.net/p/flac/bugs/ Yes, I will move this to flac-dev and file a proper bug report once I am sure it is a bug, and it's the bug I think it is. BTW, the other Xiph projects track their issues at https://trac.xiph.org/ - is it intentional that FLAC uses the sourceforge bug tracker? Is there any relation between the two? Jan _______________________________________________ Flac mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
