Skip to main content

Topic: flac 1.3.0 pre-release (Read 66616 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #100
Download at the usual location.

I just came here to thank you for the previous patches, they work on MinGW too  I'll check the binaries.
  • Last Edit: 10 April, 2013, 03:42:20 AM by ktf
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #101
I found no issues, it even works when I change the size of the console while flac is running. Great patch, I have seen this bug for years (because I've encoded quite some classical music, which usually has long filenames) but always ignored it. I hope it works as nice on Linux and other Unixes too

Screenshots:
http://www.icer.nl/misc_stuff/longlinepatch1.png
http://www.icer.nl/misc_stuff/longlinepatch2.png
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • Brazil2
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #102
thank you for the previous patches, they work on MinGW too

So would you be kind enough to share a GCC build please ?

  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #103
Not sure why you would want it (I think building with MSVC is more native than building with MinGW) but here you go. This is the build I tested this morning, which is current git plus the two UTF-8 patches by case. This one is without the long line patch though.

http://www.icer.nl/misc_stuff/flac-mingw-g...utf8patches.zip
  • Last Edit: 10 April, 2013, 05:59:45 AM by ktf
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • skamp
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #104
I'm confused. Is Case forking FLAC into a Windows-only project?
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.

  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #105
I'm confused. Is Case forking FLAC into a Windows-only project?


No? Case is supplying patches to get features into the Windows builds that have been in the Linux/*nix builds for ages, like UTF-8 support. Except the last two they are in git already, so no forking. Building on *nix still works perfectly. Cross platform projects sometimes just require some platform-specific workarounds.
  • Last Edit: 10 April, 2013, 06:04:14 AM by ktf
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • Brazil2
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #106

  • birdie
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #107
The problems birdie has look very much like broken hardware to me. Bad memory stick could easily trigger such behavior.

I uploaded fresh Win32 binaries of 1.3pre3 + git fixes here.


I have zero problems with my system - RAM is 100% errors free as I've never had a single crash.

Like it's already been mentioned, static FLAC build is horribly broken.

  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #108
I have zero problems with my system - RAM is 100% errors free as I've never had a single crash.

Case said memory stick, not RAM.

Quote
Like it's already been mentioned, static FLAC build is horribly broken.

No, it's not. I've now built statically linked on a bunch of different machines and architectures and it all worked flawlessly but for one (which failed during compiling already). I really don't know why it doesn't work on your machine though. Maybe you could explain a little more so we can do some troubleshooting? For example, are you trying to compile under Linux (what distro?), MinGW, *BSD, Solaris, etc. Have you tried using the compiler native to your OS, if it's an open-source one? It might be one of the libraries that is linked statically (libogg, libiconv etc.) is outdated or broken?
  • Last Edit: 15 April, 2013, 12:31:24 PM by ktf
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #109
Can anyone compile pre4? Thanks.

Windows compiled flac-1.3pre4: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2...ril/004057.html
Decoding and Encoding test: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2...ril/004078.html (see attached PDFs)
  • Last Edit: 01 May, 2013, 07:41:50 AM by db1989

  • ktf
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #110
Erik has announced he wants to release FLAC 1.3.0 next Saturday, so if you have any bug fixes, please be quick
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

  • chi
  • [*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #111
Erik has announced he wants to release FLAC 1.3.0 next Saturday, so if you have any bug fixes, please be quick


Actually, he said “on Saturday”, so I guess he means this Saturday, not next. (See “Which day does ‘next Tuesday’ refer to?”)

Put differently: There is some 50 hours left.

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #112
So, should we expect the final release today?

  • chi
  • [*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #113
So, should we expect the final release today?


I think that was the plan, though in that case it is already delayed (early Sunday in Australia now).

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #114
So, should we expect the final release today?


I think that was the plan, though in that case it is already delayed (early Sunday in Australia now).

Is Erik Australian?

edit:
Oh, he is from Sydney I see... http://au.linkedin.com/in/erikd
  • Last Edit: 04 May, 2013, 02:09:54 PM by eahm

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #115
Which Saturday again?

  • marc2003
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #116

  • chi
  • [*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #117
But the original plan was May 4, it just didn’t work out as planned. Perhaps next Saturday, then. :-)

  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #118
I'm eagerly anticipating the release, considering I've been 1.2.1-FLACing my entire CD lineup in the past few weeks.

Quick question - does anyone have (or can anyone build) a script which will decode all 1.2.1-FLAC files in a given folder structure, and reencode at 1.3.0, preserving metadata/tags?  I always use the strongest possible compression so would be interested in doing this, even if the disk space saved would be miniscule.


EDIT: Looks like compression increases are very minor, varying from a few kb improvement to a 4 byte decrease.  Even so, I'm still willing to give it a try.
  • Last Edit: 24 May, 2013, 05:28:30 PM by BFG

  • jensend
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #119
Quick question - does anyone have (or can anyone build) a script which will decode all 1.2.1-FLAC files in a given folder structure, and reencode at 1.3.0, preserving metadata/tags?  I always use the strongest possible compression so would be interested in doing this, even if the disk space saved would be miniscule.
Everything about your post is a terrible idea. Please don't do it.

Spend the time you would have wasted on that doing something more useful, like coming up with a meticulous sorting and classification system for your own navel lint museum. Let the electricity you would have wasted on that go to a more noble purpose, like powering a Big Mouth Billy Bass singing fish year-round.

If you're really that short on bytes of storage I'm sure that I have a spare 3.5" floppy gathering dust somewhere which I can send you. It may be only a millionth as big as a cheapo consumer hard drive these days, but it's probably a good bit more than you'll save by recompressing your collection.

  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #120
Everything about your post is a terrible idea. Please don't do it.

Spend the time you would have wasted on that doing something more useful, like coming up with a meticulous sorting and classification system for your own navel lint museum. Let the electricity you would have wasted on that go to a more noble purpose, like powering a Big Mouth Billy Bass singing fish year-round.

If you're really that short on bytes of storage I'm sure that I have a spare 3.5" floppy gathering dust somewhere which I can send you. It may be only a millionth as big as a cheapo consumer hard drive these days, but it's probably a good bit more than you'll save by recompressing your collection.


[sarcasm]You're right, I suppose the three seconds that it would take to get the batch process started would be a waste of my time.  And the 50 cents in electricity it would take for my laptop to chug through all of the files in the Power Saving mode I normally leave it on could be better used somewhere else.[/sarcasm]

Frankly, your criticism was a very bad idea and a waste of time.  If it wasn't baseless and self-defeating, I'd actually listen.
Yes, I am quite aware that there's not a lot of utility to such an effort - as made very obvious in my first post, where I indicated I expected miniscule changes.  However I'm interested to see what difference 1.3.0 makes in maximal compression, and - given it's the first update in 6 years - I think this is justifiable.
  • Last Edit: 24 May, 2013, 07:13:51 PM by BFG

  • me7
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #121
There is no compression increase with version 1.3. The differences reported earlier were due to different metadata (the flac version string).

  • BFG
  • [*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #122
There is no compression increase with version 1.3. The differences reported earlier were due to different metadata (the flac version string).

Ah!  Well in that case, I WOULD be wasting my time doing this.  Thanks.

  • saratoga
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #123
There is no compression increase with version 1.3. The differences reported earlier were due to different metadata (the flac version string).

Ah!  Well in that case, I WOULD be wasting my time doing this.  Thanks.


If you want tiny increases in compression,  you could try FLACCL or Flake.

  • Porcus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
flac 1.3.0 pre-release
Reply #124
I did recompress my 1.1.x's, simply because I wanted a one-glance overview on the lossless part of a selection in fb2k (didn't have place to read any mp3 listings when there were four different FLAC versions to be listed first).

In addition I saved a quarter, I think. Of a dollar, certainly not of an hour.

(Actually, my drives soon got on the edge of full.)