On Sun, Jun 16, 2024 at 10:19 AM Mark Filipak <markfilipak.i...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16/06/2024 03.51, Jim DeLaHunt wrote: > > On 2024-06-15 23:04, Mark Filipak wrote: > > > >> On 15/06/2024 23.39, Jim DeLaHunt wrote: > >>> On 2024-06-15 19:27, Mark Filipak wrote: > >>> > >>>> It would be nice if folks from here went here: > >>>> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/11055 > >>>> and saw what is going on. It's up to 76 comments now, so what I ask > will take you a while. > >>>> What's going on is a crime. > >>> > >>> What's the crime, detective? All I see is two people talking past > each other and not being clear > >>> about their evidence. I posted a comment with my feedback for you two. > >> > >> You posted an irrelevant comment supporting inadmissible info from one > of the accused: FFprobe > >> show_frames. > > > > _Who_ posted the criminal comment (the comment you describe as "What's > going on is a crime")? _I_ > > posted it? Check again. > > No, Jim. I posted "it's a crime" here way before your comment on ticket > 11055. "It's a crime" that > MasterQuestionable is ignoring what would be legal proof in a court of law > and is instead kicking up > a load of dust. How anyone could argue that actual timestamps from actual > packets plus actual > timestamps from framecrc that match them perfectly are somehow > disqualified or insufficient is > beyond my comprehension. showinfo and show_frames are wrong and there's no > two ways about it. The > actual timestamps and what showinfo and show_frames report are miles > apart. The bug in some internal > routine that they use is wrong in this case, of a video with these > particular properties, and I > think that's true of '-ss' and '-to' and of transcoders in which AVC/H.264 > is the source. > > > Note that the XML file which MasterQuestionable attached is from > ffprobe's -show_entries, not > > -show_frames. > > Same thing. > > > If you want to assert that those are the same thing, and that > -show_entries data is > > untrustworthy for the same reason that -show_frames data is, then you > should have some evidence for > > that assertion. > > It doesn't matter, Jim. Do I have to find EVERY problem? I found two. > Isn't that enough? Those two > will lead to the others but it looks like it's going to be closed with no > action, no code look, no > testing. This all stinks and I'm sick of it. > > I know how to make perfect cuts and splices that play perfectly, open GOPs > or closed GOPs, DTS-order > or PTS-order, and I don't give a damn if FFmpeg wants to bury the news and > leave everything > unchanged. I'm finished with it. I got no support here and I see the > picture clearly. > I find this situation very funny, finally Mark found someone on same level of trolling skills. > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-user mailing list > ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org > https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user > > To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email > ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe". > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
