Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3 (Read 4605 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

What is a difference between
oggenc 1.0.1 from www.vorbis.com
and
Oggenc2.3 using libVorbis POST v1.0.1 CVS from www.rarewares.org
Is is the same ?
And what does CVS mean ?

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

Reply #1 –
The 1.0.1 version from vorbis.com is the compile of the standard oggenc encoder based on the v1.0.1 libraries, frozen at time of release. Also, it is a MSVC6 compile.

The post v1.0.1 CVS oggenc2.3 version from Rarewares contains some frontend modifications, some created by me and some created by others that I've integrated, compiled against a later (sub)release that incorporated some bug fixes made after the 1.0.1 release. Monty, at xiph.org, has stated in the past that the latest CVS (in simple terms, just a centralised repository for the source code) code is the most stable and should be used. This compile is produced using the Intel7.1 compiler which creates binaries that execute faster.

Does that answer your questions?

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

Reply #2 –
Yes sir  Thank you

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

Reply #3 –
John33's oggenc2.3 has the useful 'padding' option which allows you pad out the vorbis comments section to it max of 4 kB, so when adding more tags, we don't need to rewrite the entire file.

I think John33 should join Xiph.Org to offer his expertise in Win32 builds of Vorbis and Theora over there. 

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

Reply #4 –
Quote
The post v1.0.1 CVS oggenc2.3 version from Rarewares contains some frontend modifications, some created by me and some created by others that I've integrated, compiled against a later (sub)release that incorporated some bug fixes made after the 1.0.1 release. Monty, at xiph.org, has stated in the past that the latest CVS (in simple terms, just a centralised repository for the source code) code is the most stable and should be used. This compile is produced using the Intel7.1 compiler which creates binaries that execute faster.

But is it still patent-free and freeware ? 
Is that CVS some kind of software or what ? Is it freeware ?
 

oggenc 1.0.1 vs. Oggenc2.3

Reply #5 –
Quote
But is it still patent-free and freeware ? 

Yes.

Quote
Is that CVS some kind of software or what ? Is it freeware ?

CVS is a type of versioning software. Versioning software is what developers use to keep track of changes between different versions of software (and even incremental changes during development). And, yes, it is free. Except Xiph has switched from CVS to Subversion recently. Which is also free. :-)