[Ffmpeg-devel] I'm giving up

[Måns Rullgård]

Michael Niedermayer said:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 04:47:46PM +0100, Luca Abeni wrote:
>> Hi Nico,
>>
>> On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 16:18 +0100, Nico Sabbi wrote:
>> [...]
>> > >>I'm saying that h264 in nal-form sounds total nonsense to me
>> > >>for the reason I wrote (because it's unusable in raw form)
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >Wait a minute.  You say NAL form is nonsense and raw form is unusable.  What
>> > >form would you like it in?  I don't know of any others.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > NAL and raw form are the same to me (because SPS and PPS are in the mux
>> > headers),
>> > as opposed to bytestream format (where headers are inline)
>> I see, your point, but this NAL (or raw) form is required by some
>> clients (for example, ISMA wants that PPS and SPS are base64-encoded in
>> the SDP, and are not transmitted inline). This can be stupid, or smart,
>> I do not know... But it is required by some standards.
>>
>> I know that I can ask the codec to encode PPS and SPS inline, and then
>> parse the stream to remove them... But why generating some NALs and then
>> removing them? I was under the impression that the
>> CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER flag was designed to help in this case, no? If
>> not, what's its purpose?
>
> CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER should cause the encoder to put the global header(s)
> in extradata, of course it should use the same format as is used in the
> bytestream if possible, any container specific reformating belongs to some
> other layer IMHO

That is exactly what the x264 wrapper currently does.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mru at inprovide.com