Dave Yeo wrote:
> The Oregon State U, Open Source Lab mirror is still missing 1.3.2
downloads.xiph.org (actually ftp.osuosl.org) is more than one machine.
Some of them have been updated, others haven't. Will chase it.
Erik
--
Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> Also, the xiph downloads page https://xiph.org/downloads/ still lists
> 1.3.1 for flac download.
Thats a different issue that I'm still chasing.
Erik
--
--
Erik de Castro Lopo
http://www.mega-nerd.com/
On 1/3/17, Dave Yeo wrote:
> On 01/02/17 11:43 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
>> Please let me know if any download.xiph.org/flac/ site is missing the
>> 1.3.2 files.
>
> The Oregon State U, Open Source Lab mirror is still missing 1.3.2
> Dave
Also, the xiph downloads page
On 01/02/17 11:43 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Please let me know if any download.xiph.org/flac/ site is missing the
1.3.2 files.
The Oregon State U, Open Source Lab mirror is still missing 1.3.2
Dave
___
flac-dev mailing list
flac-dev@xiph.org
Declan Kelly wrote:
>
> The official website doesn't link to the SourceForge project, which
> seems to be the only place that's hosting the 1.3.2 files.
There was an issue with the osul.org mirrors but it should be fixed now.
Please let me know if any download.xiph.org/flac/ site is missing
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 01:23:20PM +1100, mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
>
> The latest version of FLAC has been releases. See:
>
> https://xiph.org/flac/index.html
The official website doesn't link to the SourceForge project, which
seems to be the only place that's hosting the 1.3.2 files.
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Janne Hyvärinen wrote:
That shouldn't matter.
I realise that, but I wanted a better idea about how many people this
is like to affect. If you were on Windows XP on some old processor this
would probably not affect many people, but since you are on Windows 10
with
Janne Hyvärinen wrote:
> Attached is a patch to fix the incorrect CPU feature detection:
Patched applied, but the CPU detection code remains, horrible to
read, difficult to reason about, work on and maintain.
This fix probably warrants a new release, but I'll hold off for a
week or so to make
Janne Hyvärinen wrote:
> That shouldn't matter.
I realise that, but I wanted a better idea about how many people this
is like to affect. If you were on Windows XP on some old processor this
would probably not affect many people, but since you are on Windows 10
with a Core i7 thats a different
On 2.1.2017 19.02, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Janne Hyvärinen wrote:
Something seems to be wrong with cpu.c CPU detection code. When I
compile things with MSVC all instructions except FMA is detected as
missing, even though they are present in my CPU. That of course results
in awful
Attached is a patch to fix the incorrect CPU feature detection:
On 2.1.2017 16.39, Janne Hyvärinen wrote:
Something seems to be wrong with cpu.c CPU detection code. When I
compile things with MSVC all instructions except FMA is detected as
missing, even though they are present in my CPU. That
Something seems to be wrong with cpu.c CPU detection code. When I
compile things with MSVC all instructions except FMA is detected as
missing, even though they are present in my CPU. That of course results
in awful performance.
___
flac-dev mailing
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 01:46:20PM +1100, mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
>
> The Xiph.org download directory and github.com/xiph/flac don't seem to have
> been updated automatically as I expected. I'm chasing that.
The download host is hosted by Oregon State University - is it a mirror
site that's
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 01:46:20PM +1100, mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
>
> The Xiph.org download directory and github.com/xiph/flac don't seem to have
> been updated automatically as I expected. I'm chasing that.
I should have checked that the new downloads were available from the
official site,
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 01:23:20PM +1100, mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
> Please feel free to spread the word and please reply to this
> email to let us know where this is being announced.
Announcement was made on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/flac.audio/posts/10154824982999519
--
-Dec.
On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 07:40:57PM +, maurit...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> > FLAC 1.2.1 is the last version that works on Win95/98/NT4/2000 and
> > also it still has in_flac.dll (a plugin for Winamp 2.x). Also 1.2.1
> > is the latest official binaries that don't require SSE2. So it can
> > be useful
On Jan 01 13:46:20, mle...@mega-nerd.com wrote:
> I also notice that on sourceforge:
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/flac/files/flac-win/
> there are still 1000+ downloads per week 1.2.1 windows binaries
> with know security holes.
Does that mean the windows binaries, specifically, do
> On 1 Jan 2017, at 07:54, lvqcl.mail wrote:
>
> Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
>
>> I also notice that on sourceforge:
>>
>>https://sourceforge.net/projects/flac/files/flac-win/
>>
>> there are still 1000+ downloads per week 1.2.1 windows binaries
>> with know security
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
I also notice that on sourceforge:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/flac/files/flac-win/
there are still 1000+ downloads per week 1.2.1 windows binaries
with know security holes. What do people think of the idea of
disabling downloads of old, known buggy Windows
19 matches
Mail list logo