On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, Tomas Härdin wrote:
mån 2024-04-15 klockan 21:34 +0200 skrev Marton Balint:
Commit ed49391961999f028e0bc55767d0eef6eeb15e49 started rejecting
negative
index segment edit rates to avoid negative av_rescale parameters.
There are two
problems with this:
1) there is already a validation for zero (uninitialized) rates later
on
2) it rejects files with 0/0 index edit rates which do exist and we
should
continue to support those
There are no such files in FATE last time I checked. At the very least
we need to know which vendor is producing such broken files.
Without tests covering the workflows we want to support, we have no
confidence in refactoriing. This leads to cargo culting. And to be
sure, every workflow we support means a non-trivial amount of work,
especially when it comes to MXF.
I can add a comment to the code or the commit message, we did this plenty
of times in the past. The broken software is Marquise Technologies MT
Mediabase 4.7.2 by the way. I can also rework the patch to keep rejecting
negative values and only allow zero, as that is the only thing I *know* to
exist.
If we add a new FATE file for every fixed file or workflow, the amount of
FATE samples (and the time fate will run) will increase significantly, I
am not sure that is intended. In this case, I could only craft an MXF
file, because I don't have access to the software.
Regards,
Marton
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
