[ATrpms-users] Does latest mythtv fix 6 channel audio transcoding issue?

[Axel Thimm]

Hello Jeffrey and Jean-Yves,

On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 18:26 -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
> Axel Thimm wrote at about 20:45:47 +0200 on Tuesday, January 11, 2011:
>  > On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 01:45 -0500, Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote:
>  > > Jeffrey J. Kosowsky wrote at about 01:35:31 -0500 on Monday, January 10, 2011:
>  > >  > I just discovered that any program recorded since upgrading to 0.24
>  > >  > with 6 channel audio gets the sound destroyed since it somehow
>  > >  > transcodes the sound at 1/3 time (as it compresses 6 channels down to 2).
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > Anyway this is a critical bug that has been discussed on the mythtv
>  > >  > list with some hack fixes.
>  > >  > 
>  > >  > Has atrpms fixed this in its rpms?
>  > 
>  > No, ATrpms only has the official fixes patches in the sources.
>  > 
>  > > Just to clarify it only happens after running mythtranscode.
>  > > Here is a reference to a thread that discusses the issue:
>  > > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/466592
>  > > 
>  > > It's a pretty darn severe bug in that it basically destroys your recordings...
>  > 
>  > I agree, but the patch presented there is tagged from both the author
>  > and mythtv developers as an ugly hack and hasn't made it into the code
>  > yet, the matching ticket seems to be
>  > 
>  > http://code.mythtv.org/trac/ticket/9414
>  > 
>  > (where the patch isn't even posted).
>  > -- 
> 
> Axel,
> In general, I would agree with you BUT in this case the bug is truly a
> show stopper -- perhaps even worse in that it takes good recordings
> and turns them into unusable ones which is even worse than a crash -
> because at least if mytranscode crashed it wouldn't erase the original
> while here it thinks it was successful so it goes and deletes the
> source.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't see a lot of action on this bug, so after
> waiting almost 2 months now with a mix of ruined recordings and
> untranscoded recordings, I'm wondering whether it might make sense to
> allow an exception here to include even what may otherwise be an
> unofficial and messy patch.

This bug probably got forgotten, nobody commented on the ticket and I
didn't catch any discussion since about it (I may have missed small
threads though). Also JYA did mention that he would only have time to
fix it in February, so I think the best path is to ask JYA whether he
has some spare time to fix this. :)

Once it's in the upstream sources or even if there is a not-yet-
committed-but-blessed patch I can respin the packages.

> I would patch it myself but my system is way way underpowered (which
> is why I am using mythtranscode rather than H264 in the first place)
> and I don't think there is any way I could recompile the myth packages
> in any reasonable amount of time.
> 
> So I guess I am asking whether there is any chance you would
> reconsider and include this patch?



-- 
http://thimm.gr/ - http://ATrpms.net/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20110208/16d06e58/attachment.sig>