[Ffmpeg-devel] I'm giving up

Luca Abeni lucabe72
Wed Dec 6 16:47:46 CET 2006

Hi Nico,

On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 16:18 +0100, Nico Sabbi wrote:
> >>I'm saying that h264 in nal-form sounds total nonsense to me
> >>for the reason I wrote (because it's unusable in raw form)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Wait a minute.  You say NAL form is nonsense and raw form is unusable.  What
> >form would you like it in?  I don't know of any others.
> >
> >  
> >
> NAL and raw form are the same to me (because SPS and PPS are in the mux 
> headers),
> as opposed to bytestream format (where headers are inline)
I see, your point, but this NAL (or raw) form is required by some
clients (for example, ISMA wants that PPS and SPS are base64-encoded in
the SDP, and are not transmitted inline). This can be stupid, or smart,
I do not know... But it is required by some standards.

I know that I can ask the codec to encode PPS and SPS inline, and then
parse the stream to remove them... But why generating some NALs and then
removing them? I was under the impression that the
CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER flag was designed to help in this case, no? If
not, what's its purpose?

Copy this in your signature, if you think it is important:
                               N O    W A R ! ! !

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list