The VideoLAN Forums

vlc 0.8.6c is the first version fully working on Windows Vista
Hallelujah!!!!
http://downloads.videolan.org/pub/video ... -win32.exe

Can any Site Admin confirm this situation? At the home page still remain version 0.8.6b

Probably giving the mirrors some time to get their copy before they announce?

Can any Site Admin confirm this situation? At the home page still remain version 0.8.6b

Those versions are broken. Don't use them.

Release with new version will come in a few hours/days.

Those versions are broken. Don't use them.

Don't say stupidities, it works fine

Last time I warn you. I am the one that make the official binaries, and those are not official, and ARE broken.

Try x264 multi-threading encoding or an ogg crafted version, and you will see.

Last time I warn you. I am the one that make the official binaries, and those are not official

Is http://downloads.videolan.org/ the official server? YES
Is http://downloads.videolan.org/pub/video ... -win32.exe located on the official server? YES
Then it's official!
or May be you are admitting your servers have been compromized?

You are getting boring.

Those are testing binaries. They are broken, don't use them. Don't come back to whine if they are broken.

And stop advertising them as correct ones.

Unfortunately nearly all major software web sites announced this broken versiyon as final version. And many people downloaded this version.

http://www.computerbase.de/downloads/so ... media/vlc/

http://www.filehippo.com/download_vlc/?2825

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=40999

Those are testing binaries.

testing binaries should stay in different /test directories and not in /pub/videolan/vlc/ folder

There was a problem copying the win32 binaries onto the main download location. This has been corrected before any announcements.

The wrong files were there for a short while but not all download mirrors synced yet with the new files. The win32 files which are now on the main download with the following MD5 checks are the proper ones:

59b90723cb879bf0dbd1e63dc6b1dfd4 vlc-0.8.6c-win32.7z
0e6b9b7b6ef8ed324535a632ad8c1e04 vlc-0.8.6c-win32.exe (fixed)
dfde19880a8fd9a45393e95d3a2c0ac3 vlc-0.8.6c-win32.zip (fixed)

If you wanna be sure, just wait for the official announcement

Unfortunately nearly all major software web sites announced this broken versiyon as final version. And many people downloaded this version.

They shouldn't link to not announced files without MD5 checks and now risk having linked to the wrong ones. Better use the official link from the main site: http://www.videolan.org/mirror.php?file ... -win32.exe

For example a download from filehippo at present is NOT ok: 345e8f1b9deb2b3bfb8a09e3bff88df2 vlc-0.8.6c-win32.exe (corrupt). It's reported to them but no idea when they will fix it.

Unfortunately nearly all major software web sites announced this broken versiyon as final version. And many people downloaded this version.

http://www.computerbase.de/downloads/so ... media/vlc/

http://www.filehippo.com/download_vlc/?2825

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=40999

Especially when people announce them in that very forum... And make those sticky as if this was official.
If we don't announce, there are some good reasons.

And also, those directs links don't use our mirrors, break our main server because of heavy load and don't update our dl statistics...

And we asked them not to do it...

so I was right... VLC 0.8.6c is currently still a testing version...

Well, no, now it is the official version.

since when? 10 minutes back???

anyway, I was the one who asked for a new version, so you must rename it as vlc 0.8.7 as I who told you


PS: joking....

The numbering is quite clear. Small updates and fixes are letters, minor features are .x.y updates and big features and internal changes are .x

So why is the next version 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.7? Is it because it's such a huge leap from the current version or because 0,9,0 just sounds better?

because of the new QT4 interface...

Because there are a lot of internal changes, because of Qt, because of a lot of features.

MetalheadGautham is always right

How do you determine how many numbers to skip based on the internal updates?

good question.... ask j-b

No. What do you think I was doing? j-b?