[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] additinal desc_type for dtshd mpeg-ts demuxer

madshi dear
Mon Jun 9 17:24:40 CEST 2008

M?ns Rullg?rd schrieb:
> madshi wrote:
>>> Whatever it is, it specifies a number of additions to
>>> standard MPEG-TS, indicated by the HDMV registration
>>> descriptor.
>> Nope, only some of the additions are marked by "HDMV".
>> E.g. TrueHD tracks have an "AC-3" registration descriptor
>> and no "HDMV". So when using your logic ffmpeg would
>> not be able to handle Blu-Ray TrueHD tracks properly.
> Stop nit-picking, please.  Had you bothered to read any
> of my previous mails, you'd have realised that I *any*
> registration descriptor sufficient to identify a stream
> should be used, not only HDMV.  This is not the problem
> The problem is with when a stream has a stream type
> in the private range, and there is *no* applicable
> registration descriptor present.  When this is the
> case, we *cannot* know what it is, and we should not
> be trying to guess it.

If there's an "AC-3" registration descriptor how would you
come to the conclusion that this would be a TrueHD stream
and not a simple AC3 stream?

The only way to handle a Blu-Ray TrueHD stream correctly
is to make use of the new hard coded Blu-Ray stream type
IDs. That was the point I was trying to make. Looking at
the registration descriptor alone to identify a stream is
simply not good enough.

> I'm not talking about politics.  I'm talking about giving
> people at least some incentive to create valid streams.
> If invalid streams don't play, they'll have no choice but
> to create valid ones.  In the long run, this makes life
> much easier for everybody involved.

If ffmpeg had some kind of monopol then that might
work. But the tools commonly used for Blu-Ray and HD DVD
demuxing, remuxing, reencoding and playing today are mostly
not based on ffmpeg, as far as I can say. So you guys deciding
that you don't want to support some specific "invalid" streams
won't have much effect. If at all, people might just say:
"Oh, ffmpeg doesn't work well for these new HD formats,
let's use something else".

Anyway, I know your opinion now and you know mine.
So maybe we should leave it as that. I'm not using ffmpeg's
splitters, anyway.

> The difference is that you try to please all the whining
> users, while I send them to the firing squad.

My main interest is not in pleasing whining users. I'm interested
in making my software work as good as possible even if the
source may be "strange". I prefer software that just works
and doesn't try to lecture the user of what he should do.

Regards, madshi.

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list