similar to: Ogg encapsulation

it's good you brought this up, I want to finalize the Ogg FLAC bitstream mapping and add it to the docs. currently the way it is done in flac 1.1.0 is not ideal and probably should change. --- Arc Riley <arc@Xiph.org> wrote: > I've been implementing Ogg FLAC support in an editor I'm working on, > and > I must admit to being frustrated by the lack of support for the

i'm trying to build ices0.4 and vorbis-tools 1.0.1 with flac 1.1.1. Neither seems happy, hence the crossposting (sorry). ICES0.4 --- ices refuses to see the libFLAC library, even if i specify --with-flac=/usr/local/lib (or even just --with-flac=/usr/local/, as the configure script seems to look in the lib and include subdirectories of the specified path?). i get a configure error:

i'm trying to build ices0.4 and vorbis-tools 1.0.1 with flac 1.1.1. Neither seems happy, hence the crossposting (sorry). ICES0.4 --- ices refuses to see the libFLAC library, even if i specify --with-flac=/usr/local/lib (or even just --with-flac=/usr/local/, as the configure script seems to look in the lib and include subdirectories of the specified path?). i get a configure error:

HI all, I have already added FLAC support to libsndfile and I am now working on adding support for OggFLAC. I have a couple of question about things that seem radically different between regular FLAC and OggFLAC. 1) FLAC has a function: FLAC__seekable_stream_decoder_get_decode_position but there seems to be no corresponding function:

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > Is the debian mismatch based on a release between these too? Should > > flac-1.1.1 release have been 2:1:0? In either case, it seems rebuilding > > all the packages against the 1.1.1 library should resolve the issue? Well, if something built against 1.0.4 can (even in corner cases) malfunction with 1.1.1, then yes, it must be

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005, Ralph Giles wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 12:22:18AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > liboggflac FROM THE 1.0.4 RELEASE has version-info 0:1:0 > liboggflac FROM THE 1.1.1 RELEASE has version-info 2:1:1 Well, the packages we are having trouble here are: flac 1.1.0 (let me check... libOggFLAC version-info 1:2:0) debian package: liboggflac1 (matches

[I'm not online regularly, so don't include me in any replies. And I'm not sure if the vorbis or the flac list, or something else, is more suitable for the following, so bear with me] Moin, moin. I used a recent ogg123 to play back a FLAC file I had created, and saw it wasn't able to seek within the file. So, I thought to myself, why not try out an OggFLAC file, so I created

[I'm not online regularly, so don't include me in any replies. And I'm not sure if the vorbis or the flac list, or something else, is more suitable for the following, so bear with me] Moin, moin. I used a recent ogg123 to play back a FLAC file I had created, and saw it wasn't able to seek within the file. So, I thought to myself, why not try out an OggFLAC file, so I created

Did you try OggFLAC and MkaFLAC as alternative containers ? For OggFLAC you need libogg, the Xiph documentation should be describing how to seek in the file. But i dont know if using another container than native FLAC framing is an option for you ..... Christian matroska project admin august wrote: > sorry to bother again, > but I can narrow down my problem to certain parst of my flac

All, I have just finished uploading the source release for FLAC 1.0.4 beta to Sourceforge; there are no binary releases. See the included doc/html/news.html for the changes since 1.0.3; there are quite a few. http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/flac/flac-1.0.4_beta-src.tar.gz?download Please beat up on this as much as possible in the next week or two and try and turn up bugs. Here's a

Ok guys and gals Monty assigned me as libogg2 maintainer a few weeks ago, with the provision that I get consensus on API changes from everyone. In order to facilitate discussion, and to "move on" vs letting this stalemate hold development at a stand still, I'm setting an initial deadline of this comming Monday, May 30th. If nobody has a strong objection why these API changes

I wish I would have come across this in time for the libogg-1.1.1 release... Maybe I'm doing something wrong but here it is. One FLAC compressed frame becomes one packet when encapsulated in Ogg, and FLAC packets can be much larger than the nominal 4k page size. For CD audio they are usually 10-15Kbytes. Imagine this Ogg stream where the lines denote page boundaries and the x's are one

Now that FLAC has officionally joined the Xiph family, there are three different free audio codecs, which can be stored/transported using the ogg container. Would it be possible to create an API and/or a library that would cover them all? If my understanding of the situation is correct, if an application wants to support vorbis, speex and flac, it has to use three different interfaces.

Now that FLAC has officionally joined the Xiph family, there are three different free audio codecs, which can be stored/transported using the ogg container. Would it be possible to create an API and/or a library that would cover them all? If my understanding of the situation is correct, if an application wants to support vorbis, speex and flac, it has to use three different interfaces.

Now that FLAC has officionally joined the Xiph family, there are three different free audio codecs, which can be stored/transported using the ogg container. Would it be possible to create an API and/or a library that would cover them all? If my understanding of the situation is correct, if an application wants to support vorbis, speex and flac, it has to use three different interfaces.

On Fri, 2006-01-13 at 10:41 -0800, Arc Riley wrote: > I believe this problem was fixed in my branch well over a year ago. > These fixes have not been merged into trunk. > > Checkout http://svn.xiph.org/branches/ogg2-arc > > See if it fixes your problem. I've done bitpacking using this patched > library and trunk/py-ogg2 and it seems to be fine. I'd rather use

Ok guys and gals Monty assigned me as libogg2 maintainer a few weeks ago, with the provision that I get consensus on API changes from everyone. In order to facilitate discussion, and to "move on" vs letting this stalemate hold development at a stand still, I'm setting an initial deadline of this comming Monday, May 30th. If nobody has a strong objection why these API changes

Ok guys and gals Monty assigned me as libogg2 maintainer a few weeks ago, with the provision that I get consensus on API changes from everyone. In order to facilitate discussion, and to "move on" vs letting this stalemate hold development at a stand still, I'm setting an initial deadline of this comming Monday, May 30th. If nobody has a strong objection why these API changes

Ok guys and gals Monty assigned me as libogg2 maintainer a few weeks ago, with the provision that I get consensus on API changes from everyone. In order to facilitate discussion, and to "move on" vs letting this stalemate hold development at a stand still, I'm setting an initial deadline of this comming Monday, May 30th. If nobody has a strong objection why these API changes

Ok guys and gals Monty assigned me as libogg2 maintainer a few weeks ago, with the provision that I get consensus on API changes from everyone. In order to facilitate discussion, and to "move on" vs letting this stalemate hold development at a stand still, I'm setting an initial deadline of this comming Monday, May 30th. If nobody has a strong objection why these API changes