On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:30:52 JST
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Church) wrote:

> >That's pretty fine excepts for the fact that MPEG multiplexor will not pop
> >out soon, surely not for 1.1.0 (at least not from my side,
> >unfortunately :( ). So we need a temporary solution and perhaps the better
> >thing it's to add a second-instance multiplexor (triggered by -m usage, I
> >think).
> 
>      Okay, then why don't we do that for now?

Well, I'll patch existing code as long as I find some more spare time ;)

>  That leaves the question of
> how to decide which multiplexor to use, but in the common (mp2) case it's
> just raw data, so I guess we could default to multiplex_raw,

At this moment my vote goes to "let the user choose", of course providing
some documentation to help the user do a wise choice, and maybe defaulting
to raw multiplexor. In other words, my idea is to require something like:

transcode [...] -y foo,bar,buz,raw -m /tmp/blah.ext [...]

Read: if user selects separate audio file (-m option), then REQUIRE the
selection of second multiplexor too.
Exit complaining if
- second multiplexor selected (fourth -y argument) but NOT -m provided
- -m provided but second multiplexor NOT selected

> with maybe a
> hack to use multiplex_wav (uh, looks like somebody needs to write it ;) )
> if the filename ends in .wav?

It exists already, it's merged with yuv4mpeg "multiplexor" :)
You can find both in "multiplex_y4m" module. Okay, maybe this sucks and maybe
the name chooses sucks even more, but at time of writing this I was in mood
"no more that one multiplexor at time!" :P

Seriously speaking, I think this situation can stay as well as we are able to
found a name more explicative and that sounds better for 'multiplex_y4m'.

Splitting such multiplexor, if we go for this, isn't a pain, anyway.

>      BTW, I just hacked the -y option and encoder.c so you can now say
> -y vid,aud,mplex and get the NMS encoder (if you only specify 1 or 2 then
> it uses the old code).  I did a little testing with -y xvid,copy,avi and
> it seems to work fine.

Yeah, I'm going to give it a spin too. ;)

>  Good work! (:

My pleasure. But there is still a lot to do ;)


Best regards,

-- 
Francesco Romani - Ikitt ['people always complain, no matther what you do']
IM contact: (email-me, I have antispam default deny!) icq://27-83-87-867
some known bugs: http://www.transcoding.org/cgi-bin/transcode?Bug_Showcase

Reply via email to