Am 8. August 2020 14:52:02 MESZ schrieb Zane van Iperen <[email protected]>: >On Sat, 08 Aug 2020 13:05:28 +0200 >"Alexander Strasser" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >@@ -296,8 +298,7 @@ static int argo_asf_write_header(AVFormatContext >> >*s) >> > ArgoASFContext *ctx = s->priv_data; >> > >> > ctx->fhdr.magic = ASF_TAG; >> >- ctx->fhdr.version_major = 2; >> >- ctx->fhdr.version_minor = 1; >> >+ /* version_{major,minor} set by options. */ >> >> Stupid question: Why are you adding options to override the file >format version? >> >> Normally those versions have implications on the syntax and/or >semantics of the files they are embedded in. >> >> Am I misreading or misunderstanding something? >> > >You're right to think that, that's what I originally thought too. >When researching the file format, I investigated several different file >versions and their structure was identical. > >I think it's really only used as some kind of psuedo-identifier that >tells which game the file came from, and I'm pretty sure some of the >games check the version too (hence the options). > >I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but until other files surface I think >allowing the user to specify the version is fine.
I see. Maybe it's not the version of the format, but has implications of what can be inside. Anyway I didn't look at any files, so just some wild guessing. I would advise to use the verb override instead of set in the option description. I think it's less ambiguous. Like more expectations "you are doing this on your own" and less "FFmpeg will use Version 2.4 of the format now". Alexander _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list [email protected] https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
