Speex dev - Aug 2004 - Invalid comment fields...

Just been looking at a few speex files i have, and it seems several of them
have comment packets that are not to spec....

Specifically, they are not in the format a=b, some of them just have a field
with data and no "key". The files say they were encoded with speex
1.0,
should these be considered invalid, ie just ignore any malformed comment
field ?

Thanks,

Zen.

On sam, 2004-07-24 at 13:40 +0800, illiminable wrote:
> Just been looking at a few speex files i have, and it seems several of them
> have comment packets that are not to spec....
>
> Specifically, they are not in the format a=b, some of them just have a
field
> with data and no "key". The files say they were encoded with
speex 1.0,
> should these be considered invalid, ie just ignore any malformed comment
> field ?
I think the problem is that speexenc allows a generic --comment option
that allows everything instead of checking that there's an "="
somewhere. For the decoder, I guess I should also reject incorrect
comments, but for now, I don't. Patches are welcome.

Jean-Marc

--
Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@USherbrooke.ca>
Universit? de Sherbrooke
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?Url :
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20040724/d7adb35f/attachment.pgp

<1090648103.3192.5.camel@modemcable182.55-70-69.mc.videotron.ca>
<20040726062111.GD28935@vergenet.net>
Message-ID:
<1090826719.4202.0.camel@modemcable182.55-70-69.mc.videotron.ca>
> speexenc patch attached :)
Applied, it'll be in 1.1.6.

Jean-Marc

--
Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@USherbrooke.ca>
Universit? de Sherbrooke