Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:31:18 -0500
From:      "Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net>
To:        Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: amarok doesn't support id3v2?
Message-ID:  <20110820153118.6239a483@cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110820121001.654aa63d@cox.net>
References:  <20110817004913.792c125d@serene.no-ip.org> <201108201022.36963.tijl@coosemans.org> <20110820121001.654aa63d@cox.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 12:10:01 -0500
"Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:22:28 +0200
> Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org> wrote:
> > 
> > I suspect taglib uses id3v2.4 whereas id3lib (used by id3v2 port)
> > only supports id3v2.3.
> 
> Ah, interesting.  Hadn't considered such a possibility.
> 
> Still, I'm puzzled.  If I take a perfectly tagged file, modify it in
> any way inside amarok, and then try to view the tags again using the
> command line tool id3v2, all the id3v2 tags have been blown away.
> 
> Is there that radical a change between the ID3 spec version 2.3 and
> 2.4 that the tags would be completely unrecognizable anymore by id3v2?

I asked about this on the id3v2 mailing list, and apparently, it is
quite likely that some of the newer tags/frames in 2.4 are tripping up
the older id3v2 tool.  Gonna do a little hex dumping, etc. to verify,
but it sounds like the probable cause.

Any replacement suggestions for id3v2?  I've gotten used to using this
thing in my little custom scripts.  Obviously need something new here.

Thanks.

-- 
Conrad J. Sabatier
conrads@cox.net



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110820153118.6239a483>