1) I think this is a pointless topic because how often do people have their
files wrongly extensioned?
2) as far as playback is concerned, it is at best non trivial to make it
work and would slow down buffering and increase bin/ram usage for a mostly
pointless addition.
3) I don't see why this woul
On 8-11-2010 2:16, Teruaki Kawashima wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to ask for testers for FS#6321 - Universal Image Viewer
>
> The patch unifies jpeg viewer, png viewer, and bmp viewer to one plugin,
> image viewer so that you can navigate through different image formats.
> Downside might be that the
Am 10.11.2010 23:03, schrieb Jonathan Gordon:
2010/11/10 Jonas Häggqvist:
How do the codecs handle this?
Silently ignores the file. Just tried copying a .mp3 to .flac and
playing it, track is completely skipped with no reason given.
What is the problem with checking for those magic numbers,
p
2010/11/10 Jonas Häggqvist :
> How do the codecs handle this?
Silently ignores the file. Just tried copying a .mp3 to .flac and
playing it, track is completely skipped with no reason given.
Probably a very sensible idea.
On 10/11/2010 10:32 PM, "Teruaki Kawashima" wrote:
> (2010/11/10 1:16), Alex Parker wrote:
>> On 9 November 2010 16:57, Teruaki Kawashima wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for suggestion and information.
>>> I agree that it would be better to look for magic number.
>>> but I'
On 09-11-2010 22:25, Paul Louden wrote:
I think an error message saying "Image appears to be a .png" when a .bmp
is loaded with the magic numbers for a PNG, and possibly a refusal to load
it, makes some sense.
Being too intelligent and acting like nothing went wrong isn't really an
entirely posi
(2010/11/10 1:16), Alex Parker wrote:
On 9 November 2010 16:57, Teruaki Kawashima wrote:
Thank you for suggestion and information.
I agree that it would be better to look for magic number.
but I'll leave it for now unless it causes serious problem that judging by
file-extension.
teru
Wheth
