2007/10/19, Josh Coalson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > --- Harry Sack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi > > > > here some questions about the md5 checksum: > > > > - what happens when the md5 checksum of the decoded audio is > > different > > of the internally stored checksum due to file corruption ? Will > > playing/decoding still be possible (with some error frames) or will > > playing /decoding be not possible at all (so all audio data is lost)? > > md5 does not affect decoding at all, it is a just a checksum to > tell you at the end if it matches the whole audio or not.
thanks for the answer, but then there is wrong information on some sites that tell about flac :s. There is written the flac decoder doesn't decode the audio at all when the md5 checksum doesn't match. > - what happens when the metadata blocks get corrupt? will the audio > > part still be decodable even when non-audio blocks are corrupt? > > yes > > > - since there is only a md5 checksum on the audio blocks itself, what > > happens when some wav metadata gets corrupt and you want to decode > > that data? How can the decoder detect it's corrupt or not because > > there is no md5 checksum for this data? > > depends on the corruption, some kinds are recoverable, some are not. > read the format spec first and it should become clear. Why is there no md5 checksum on the WAV metadata? Because how can flac otherwise be called a 'lossless' codec when the metadata of the WAV file can't be guaranteed 100% identical to the original, when there is file corruption, because there is no md5 checksum on it? thx Harry Josh > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com >
_______________________________________________ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac