[NUT-devel] Patch for info packets

[Michael Niedermayer]

Hi

On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 08:18:32PM +0200, Oded Shimon wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:11:25PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:10:13PM +0200, Oded Shimon wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:15:24PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:26:07PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> > > > > > > -    "TotalTime"
> > > > > > > -        total length of the stream in msecs
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > hmmmmm, global info packets dont have chapter_len, index is optional and
> > > > > > you remove this umm ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > I thought it was our intent that index would not be "optional". IIRC I
> > > > > suggested defining in the spec a 'NUT stream authored for permenant
> > > > > storage' or something similar, and requiring such a stream to conform
> > > > > to several conditions such as: repeated headers, index present, ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > The idea is that a partially written, truncated, streamed, etc. NUT
> > > > > file would not be a a "NUT stream authored for permenant storage" and
> > > > > would not be subject to these requirements, but NUTlint would check
> > > > > these things and indicate to the user that the file is not conformant
> > > > > to the more restrictive requirements.
> > > > > 
> > > > > BTW in the case of a truncated file where the index is lost, knowing
> > > > > TotalTime is not useful anyway since it will be wrong.
> > > > 
> > > > and the chapter lengthes? its a PITA to go and read the index to find
> > > > the last chapter length
> > > 
> > > I'm ok with bringing back 'totaltime' or having some other solution for 
> > > having the length for the last chapter...
> > 
> > Why not just store the length in the info???
> > This is where they belong. If someone has indexed segments of the file
> > as chapters, they probably want an idea of total time. If not the file
> > should be treated as a pure stream and TotalTime is nonsense. In the
> > trivial case where someone wants TotalTime but no chapter divisions
> > they can just make one big chapter/segment.
> 
> New patch. One kink left to sort out is info frames. My suggestion for it 
> is to use negative chapter id's..
> 
> Can I commit this patch?

ok

[...]

-- 
Michael