[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-devel-irc] IRC log for 2010-03-28

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Wed Mar 31 14:36:14 CEST 2010

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 12:13:40PM +0000, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni <at> gmx.at> writes:
> > the problem is matroska + h264 in general, its not needed to be PAFF
> > though that surely makes it worse
> Am I understanding you correctly that the H264 timestamp issue we know of does
> also exist for non-PAFF samples?

there is a timestamp issue with non PAFF h264, i dont know if you consider it
to be "the issue we know of"
the issue i know of is that 75% of mandatory timestamp handling is not

> Do you know the specific reference stream you
> are referring to from out of your head?


> > > (So the question is: Which "reports" do you mean?)
> > 
> > there was someone who submited a patch to do some very broken timestamp
> > guessing in matroska*.c, this looked alot like an attempt to implement the
> > timestamp calculation we are missing just completly wrongly at the complete
> > wrong place.
> Again:
> This is issue 807, I am convinced it has nothing to do with H264 timestamps
> (which I agree have bugs, but they are not related to the issue or the patch you
> think of).

807 seems to be about a number of unrelated bugs not one.


Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

While the State exists there can be no freedom; when there is freedom there
will be no State. -- Vladimir Lenin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20100331/8da37e7e/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list