From: Sven H. <hei...@id...> - 2004-01-19 08:58:53
|
On Monday 12 January 2004 19:18, Michael Roitzsch wrote: > Hi Sven, > > > > So these were actually two different editions of LotR-TT? That's > > > weird. They should not have the same serial number. > > > > Well, just to be exact (sorry if this is a bit nit-picking, maybe > > everybody understood it already, but this is the point of "equal" and > > "the same" again ;-) ): Both where "LOTR-TT, Extended Edition, Disc > > 1" - but just different discs. They have defenitely different keys, > > but somehow it seems that they have got the same serial number. As > > said before, I am going to test that again, hopefully until > > end-of-week. > > How can two discs with the same content be encrypted with two different > keys? I don't think any studio would do that, since it just increases > the costs (you have to use two different stampers). Let me know the > outcome when you get to check the other disc, this is quite > interesting. Ok, I verified this, and the answer is: some discs (same title, same editio= n)=20 defenitely might have got the same serial number, but different keys. I=20 checked this with two different packages of "LOTR-TT, Extended Edition". I= =20 just checked each of the both main movie DVDs, not the extra stuff. However= ,=20 if this happens once, it might happen again. I dont know wether this is a b= ug=20 of the DVD manufacturer and if this is compliant to the DVD standard, howev= er=20 for sure libdvd*** creates just one cache entry for all these DVDs and of=20 coure fails reading except for that one the cache entry was created for. I already created a bug report and filed a patch which includes the (always= =20 differet) disc key in the database entry name. Now it works, maybe this pat= ch=20 or something similar will make it into the next libdvd*** version. Regards, Sven Heithecker =2D-=20 Gr=FC=DFe, Sven Heithecker |