You are complaining over and over about the same issue, without listening; and attacking developers and telling them you know better. You are attacking the usefulness of a media player because your file does not play automatically... This is very close to ranting, yes.Sigh. Why is it that anyone who disagrees with the statements of the powers that be here on the fora are ranting? I am not ranting. I am merely pointing out obvious illogical inconsistencies in your statements, that underly a foundational philosophy that hampers the usefulness of the application.
PCM extensions and mimetype fails quite often and are not strong enough to trust them for auto-detection. There are so many good reasons, including security, that we don't use that and will not use that.For instance it is a clear error that "there is nothing in this file that tells you it is a PCM file. Absolutely nothing, no header, no magic number." This statement is totally incorrect, and without merit. There most certainly is something in the file that tells anyone who looks at it that it is a PCM file, without ever having to open the file in any sort of editor, namely, the file name. When a file is named AudioFile.PCM, I suspect that well over 90% of the time, it can be assumed that it is a PCM file. It is certainly 100% of the time that this assumption is justified. How is it that you think that the other players I have opened the file in and played it with no problem manage to figure it out?!? Surely this would not be the only application that has ever used the file extension to tell it information about the file type. (That is, after all the entire POINT of the file extension in the first place.)
Which means that it cannot work out of the box, because extensions are not enough to detect.just to clarify, this is a raw CDDA LPCM format. ie: the exact same format that streams off of a normal CD. you are correct that it has no detectable format outside the file name itself, the full format must be assumed. but if you assume the proper format (44.1khz, 16bit, stereo, little-endian), it does indeed play just fine. i say "headerless" to indicate there is no WAV or AIFF header, which would make the format detectable. it just starts right in with the linear PCM data.
I did nothing of the kind. I merely pointed out a succession of inaccurate statements. I did not make the same "complaints over and over again." You claimed the file was not playable. I pointed out that it is. You claimed the file itself claimed it had video. The file makes no such claim. You claimed that there was no way to tell what kind of data was in the file. I pointed out that this was not the case, as the file extension does that. I did not repeat these statements over and over again, except insofar as these inaccurate statements continued to be made. Nor is it true that I did not listen. Your statements, regarding the data in this file, and the format in general, however, were categorically in error. Certainly the snippet you quoted exhibits neither of these claims.You are complaining over and over about the same issue, without listening
If a file does not play, that has direct bearing on the usefulness of a media player. What other metric could you possibly use? Pointing this out is not "attacking" it, nor is it ranting.You are attacking the usefulness of a media player because your file does not play automatically... This is very close to ranting, yes.
So you are essentially saying that to avoid the player failing a relatively small percentage of the time based on an incorrect file extension, you are willing to fail 100% of the time (and not, by the way, give the user any clear indication whatsoever that playback has failed). That makes little sense. As to other issues, file headers can be faked by nefarious evil-doers just as easily as file extensions. You even go so far as to invite me to write code to allow the file to play. If security was really the concern here, such code would never be allowed in the code base in the first place. Besides which, any "security" concerns are not ameliorated by allowing the file to be played via the command line. Playing via CLI and playing via UI with default values would lead to the same security issues, so I really don't buy it.PCM extensions and mimetype fails quite often and are not strong enough to trust them for auto-detection.
It is not playable automatically by VLC, which is exactly what this discussion is about. Else, why complain on the forum?I did nothing of the kind. I merely pointed out a succession of inaccurate statements. I did not make the same "complaints over and over again." You claimed the file was not playable.You are complaining over and over about the same issue, without listening
Which is exactly what the logs you posted say. Read them again and grep from MPEG1/2.You claimed the file itself claimed it had video.
I stand by it, there is no way to tell what kind of data is in the file.You claimed that there was no way to tell what kind of data was in the file.
And I told you why this is not accurate enough to use this as a fact. And you do not like this answer.I pointed out that this was not the case, as the file extension does that.
I disagree. This file has no header and absolutely no confident way to have its format detected.Your statements, regarding the data in this file, and the format in general, however, were categorically in error.
See above. I tell you that the file is not playable by VLC, and you keep telling it is doable, then telling us to "guess" the right values.
If a file does not play, that has direct bearing on the usefulness of a media player. What other metric could you possibly use? Pointing this out is not "attacking" it, nor is it ranting.
This makes a lot of sense. Almost 10% of files have wrong extensions. Look at this forum and our bugtracker.So you are essentially saying that to avoid the player failing a relatively small percentage of the time based on an incorrect file extension, you are willing to fail 100% of the time (and not, by the way, give the user any clear indication whatsoever that playback has failed). That makes little sense.PCM extensions and mimetype fails quite often and are not strong enough to trust them for auto-detection.
Which is why we need headers to play automatically, and to check them. Thank you for proving my point. Files without headers cannot be played automatically.As to other issues, file headers can be faked by nefarious evil-doers just as easily as file extensions.
Of course, because you seem to imply that you know more than me (us). Therefore, probably you are way smarter and have an excellent idea that would be allowed in the codebase. But I seriously doubt it.You even go so far as to invite me to write code to allow the file to play. If security was really the concern here, such code would never be allowed in the code base in the first place.
We do not know that, see above.Also, I would point out that, this being the case, KNOWING it was a PCM file (since I stated directly in the subject heading that it was)
What I also see is someone who thinks he knows better than everyone. Maybe you do, but then, we wait for your patches.I am sorry you decided to feel so attacked and beleaguered. As I said, it certainly was not my intent. But even reading back through the thread again now, all I see is an overreaction to an honest disagreement over statements of fact, and a succession of attempts to deflect criticism.
As pointed out repeatedly, and even acknowledged by you here, yes it IS playable by VLC. (You give it the right parameters on the CLI, it plays fine.)It is not playable by VLC, which is exactly what this discussion is about. Else, why complain on the forum?
And again, it makes no difference what VLC incorrectly states in the log files. There is no video in the PCM files, and VLC is incorrectly making those statements on ALL PCM files. Claiming it has video in it because VLC incorrectly states there is video in it is circular logic. VLC is not correct. There is no video, regardless of what the logs state.Which is exactly what the logs you posted say. Read them again and grep from MPEG1/2.
And yet other media players seem to manage to play the files just fine.I stand by it, there is no way to tell what kind of data is in the file.
Because it is not a real answer, nor is it accurate. First, the idea that there are a significant number of files out there masquerading as PCMs that are really not is unsupportable by the facts. Second, even if that were the case, attempting to play them and failing occasionally is a far preferable scenario than failing 100% of the time. Certainly that happens already. There are a number of times VLC fails to play various formats. It gracefully informs the user and waits. Are you saying that VLC should just not attempt to play those files, too?DeusExMachina wrote:
I pointed out that this was not the case, as the file extension does that.
And I told you why this is not accurate enough to use this as a fact. And you do not like this answer.
No, I keep telling you VLC DOES play the file. You are confusing and confounding two separate statements. You say VLC categorically can not play the file, and I keep pointing out that it can. I HAVE played the file in VLC. You are confounding this with the issue of whether VLC can play this track automatically, which it can not, but an argument can be made that it should. Regardless of one's position on this, replying to the claim that VLC should be able to play this track automatically with the statement that it can't play it at all is clearly a false statement.See above. I tell you that the file is not playable by VLC, and you keep telling it is doable, then telling us to "guess" the right values.
How can it not be? Not playing them makes the player LESS versatile, not more. Besides which, a 10% failure rate is far better than a 100% rate, which is what you have now, with a file format that should be succeeding, using your numbers, 90% of the time. Besides, again, the app already fails on several files formats for just this reason.This makes a lot of sense. Almost 10% of files have wrong extensions. Look at this forum and our bugtracker.So you are essentially saying that to avoid the player failing a relatively small percentage of the time based on an incorrect file extension, you are willing to fail 100% of the time (and not, by the way, give the user any clear indication whatsoever that playback has failed). That makes little sense.DeusExMachina wrote:
PCM extensions and mimetype fails quite often and are not strong enough to trust them for auto-detection.
Files that cannot be autodetected are not playable without users intervention. I don't see how this can be changed for a versatile media player.
It does not prove your point. A spoofed header is not magically rendered inert by your reading them automatically. I could just as easily claim that since file extensions can be spoofed, they need to be played automatically. This is the EXACT mirror of your argument. and recapitulate my exact point.Which is why we need headers to play automatically, and to check them. Thank you for proving my point. Files without headers cannot be played automatically.DeusExMachina wrote:
As to other issues, file headers can be faked by nefarious evil-doers just as easily as file extensions.
I did nothing of the kind. Feel free to point out specifically where I did. I DID point out errors in your statements, that I can prove empirically, such as you claiming VLC can't play a file, when I know for a fact that it can, because I HAVE done so.Of course, because you seem to imply that you know more than me (us). Therefore, probably you are way smarter and have an excellent idea that would be allowed in the codebase. But I seriously doubt it.DeusExMachina wrote:
You even go so far as to invite me to write code to allow the file to play. If security was really the concern here, such code would never be allowed in the code base in the first place.
Again, feel free to quote specifically where I made any statements that implied that. Me pointing out clearly incorrect statements made in this thread is not a example.What I also see is someone who thinks he knows better than everyone. Maybe you do, but then, we wait for your patches.
This is EXACTLY the suggestion I made, and was given some completely bogus argument about security issues with MIMEtypes and a bunch of other factually erroneous or logically invalid statements.So VLC does not autodetect raw audio files, but maybe it could play with values stored against the PCM filetype.
What on earth is "a correct audio format"?!? How is PCM not "a correct audio format"?Convert your files to a correct audio format, with header, its as simple as that. Such information needs to be stored within the file, not somehwere else in VLC.
You might be able to even use VLCs command line to do that, and you can write a script so you do not need to type the commands every time.
(Note: You do not need to give any time in your posts, its already printed by the forum software. )
Return to “VLC media player for macOS Troubleshooting”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests