The OP seems to have decided that using .sfv checksums is the ticket. 
You can do the same thing with PAR2 and decide if/what the level of
redundancy will be, giving you a means of recovery.  But if you have
backups of your library you don't really need the recovery abiility,
just the ability to discover corrupted files.

One thing I don't get is the OP's rejection of PAR2 because "I do
change tags regularly".  With PAR2 and .sfv any other type of checksum
file verification, you must regenerate a file's checksum any time the
file has been modified.

For Flac librarise, Erland's suggestion of simply using Flac itself to
test the integrity of files seems the simplest and most foolproof.  You
don't even need to regenerate checksums when you make tagging changes.


-- 
JJZolx

Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------
JJZolx's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=39578

_______________________________________________
ripping mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping

Reply via email to