similar to: Can't compile ast_rxfax with Asterisk 1.2.1b

Has anybody been successful with compiling the pre3 version of SpanDSP on the current Asterisk CVS? I'm getting: app_rxfax.c: In function `phase_e_handler': app_rxfax.c:77: warning: implicit declaration of function `fax_get_transfer_statistics' app_rxfax.c:78: warning: implicit declaration of function `fax_get_far_ident' app_rxfax.c:79: warning: implicit declaration of

hi I have just downloaded the win32 installer 1.2.1b and uninstalled my previous version 1.2.1a. But I don't see any difference in both installers: they both have flac frontend and flac tester and the command line tools flac.exe and metaflac.exe. So can somebody tell me please what the difference is between 1.2.1a and 1.2.1b? thx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was

I thought this had been answered before, but cannot find confirmation: if I recall correctly there's hardly any advantage (if any) to re-encoding from 1.2.1b to 1.3.0 at the highest compression level (8/best), right? --Martin

I thought this had been answered before, but cannot find confirmation: if I recall correctly there's hardly any advantage (if any) to re-encoding from 1.2.1b to 1.3.0 at the highest compression level (8/best), right? --Martin

Hi all, Here are some patches updating the website. 1) Fixes the changelog.html menubar 2) Updates documentation 3) Updates news feed 4) Updates downloads and adds some links Patch 2 and 4 were to big for the list, unfortunately. They can be found here: http://www.audiograaf.nl/misc_stuff/0002-Update-API-and-tools-documentation.patch.xz

Josh Coalson <xflac at yahoo.com> wote: > --- Victor Koechli <odritug at yahoo.de> wrote: > > Just to let you know: > > > > The FLAC-Installer (downloadable from sourceforge) contains a > > W32/Backdoor2.AAKG virus, and so does the included uninstaller. Is > > this an error of my virus scanner, or did a virus indeed creep in? > > can

I'm sorry if this isn't the place to ask this question, but I was unable to find any other form of contact on the FLAC website. I'm trying to rip two CDs to FLAC, and want to use EAC, but the link to download the official FLAC tools is dead. Therefore, I'm unsure of what to download. Any help, please? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Greetings, In reviewing the changelogs it?s unclear in which release FLAC began supporting a sample rate of 192kHz. The reason for my question is that there are many forums and university studies that state that FLAC does not support a sample rate of 192kHz however the current documentation (assumed 1.2.1b) under FORMAT under FRAME_HEADER does note that it is supported. If it was not

1) changelog.html "Add ability to handle utf8 filenames on Windows (large set of patches from Janne Hyv?rinen)" AFAIK Windows internally uses UTF-16LE, not UTF-8. IMHO it's better to use a general word 'Unicode' instead of 'utf8'. 2) documentation_bugs.html "The following are major known bugs in the current (1.2.1) release:" 1.2.1 is not the current

lvqcl wrote: > I have a couple of questions: > > 1) Do you plan to release 1.3.1 pre1, pre2 etc or just 1.3.1 w/o any pre-releases? I had not planned to do a pre-release. > 2) Do you plan to release any official binaries (flac, metaflac, maybe something else)? Nor had I planned to release binaries. The source code tarball ends up here: https://svn.xiph.org/releases/flac/ I

On 12.12.2012, at 20:10, Ralph Giles wrote: > On 12-12-12 10:47 AM, Max Horn wrote: > >> If you point me to the sources of the site (is there a repos for it?), I'll be happy to provide a patch for this, too! > > The new site repo is https://git.xiph.org/flac-website.git Hum. Actually, I just noticed that the website is also in the flac repos itself, under doc/html/ The

Hi again, On 29.11.2012, at 21:10, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > Max Horn wrote: > >> 1) Is there any chance the website could be updated? > > I'd like to have the flac.sf.net website re-directed to > https://www.xiph.org/flac/ . Until the re-direct happens > the rest of the world still points to sf.net. So we are still waiting for Josh to grant admin rights for