Last post by rogeriol -
it's a shame that no encoders are available for general use. it seems this codec is very restricted, only in dedicated hw for now.
@charlie_su1986 thank you
Yeah, it seems that firefox caches pages now, because download link appeared after force refreshing the page (CTRL-F5) :\That was due to misconfiguration of cache control on the server. Fixed, thanks.
in previous version i generated "hh_ello.m3u" file with contentAh. I was not aware of use cases when track path can retain original URL scheme, And this is one of them.
Fixed in beta5. For supported URLs without custom scheme was added redirection to fy+ when track info is requested or decoding starts. Files with http and https schemes are "remote", which affects their processing. [If I understand correctly] when such file is part of playlist, file info is not requested when playlist is being added. So you'll get your big playlist loaded instantly, but without metadata. Remoteness also means at least that embedded album art will not be loaded for such files. In context of this component that means there will be no thumbnail as album art. And metadata edit is also not possible (either because file is remote or because it is http/https).
hmm i append fy+ to http: but very very slow opening m3u file with 2000 lines to playlistThat is because unlike http/https, fy+ files are declared as "not remote" by the component. So file info gets requested when such files are added from playlist. If you don't have yet that info in the cache, a clip analysis will be initiated, which may take few seconds per clip. So adding a large playlist may take a long time. Though when you'll add it next time, that will be quick.
As long as its a "patched" component, only the API Key changes, am I right?
I have determined that foobar2000 needs to create a file named "running" in the same folder, where the foobar2000.exe is located.Only when foobar2000 is in portable mode. Otherwise this file goes to %USERPROFILE%\AppData\Roaming\foobar2000
If the folder was "c:\program files\foobar200\", the user has to have a write/create file permissions on it.It's a bad idea to put portable programs into "Program Files" folder.
Is it possible to limit the selection of the pool to the tracks from a specific playlist (as opposed to any tracks from the media library) ?No.
I have determined that foobar2000 needs to create a file named "running" in the same folder, where the foobar2000.exe is located. If the folder was "c:\program files\foobar200\", the user has to have a write/create file permissions on it. According to the Windows 10 security concept it is not recommend and would weaken the system security - even both explicit permission grant and/or executing as administrator. Such practice to make a program folder read-only is used also in UNIX/linux world, where process activity flags are created as a rule in /var.
So my proposal is to "teach" foobar2000 a little bit to the level of the modern programming culture.
It would be very compromizing if this good software was used as an entry gate for a malicious attack.
Maybe Do you have a specific use case? Please do share..
Last post by Porcus -
I wonder why nobody used the name before. Nyquist. It rolls off the marketing tongue.It is not so uncommon in Sweden, more than 1 in (*searching*) 3000 if you count the different spellings. (Harry Nyquist was born "Nyqvist", which is the more common form in .se)