On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Alex Converse <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2012/3/8 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>:
>> Alex Converse <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Alex Converse <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> From: Carl-Eugen Hoyos <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Converse <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  libavformat/mpegts.c |    1 +
>>>>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> LGTM.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thinking about this more I'm not really sure if it's correct at all.
>>> Yes it fixes the particular sample but I think we should be honoring
>>> the registration descriptor instead.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> The registration descriptor should always be used.  If there is none,
>> there's no telling what streams with private IDs contain.
>>
>
> So why do we explicitly ignore it?

Private data formats aren't handled correctly right now -
STREAM_TYPE_PRIVATE_DATA only refers to 0x6 which is what 302M
specifies.
There's nothing stopping anyone from changing (or keeping the same)
their 302M bitstream and sticking another stream_type from 0x80->0xff.

So basically it's a bug. Either you could let a descriptor trump
stream_type for everything or just make it trump stream_type for all
types of private data.
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to