2GB file size limitation

dingding
2005-09-08
2013-05-30
  • dingding

    dingding - 2005-09-08

    Hi guys,

    Just find the mediatomb has the 2GB file size limitation. it can not work with video files over 2GB. Any idea to fix it?

     
    • x_gen

      x_gen - 2005-09-08

      Hey, first of all, thank you very much for feedback, there are probably lots of issues we won't find withoutour your help! Always welcome.

      We'll check what's wrong, if the limitation comes from the UPnP SDK, that will mean some more troubles, the SDK would need patching. We slowly think we should simply include it into our source tree and adapt for all already existing and yet upcoming issues. If it's our source's trouble, that's a matter of a couple of minutes.

      Regards

       
    • Jin

      Jin - 2005-09-12

      Hi,

      we looked at the problem and it seems that the SDK has to be patched in order to get this to work. That means that we can not fix this issue quickly - we are going to include the SDK source tree in our project and adapt it as needed.

      DSM-320 users will also profit from that, because we will be able to include DSM-320 related patches (like the redsonic http headers) directly.

      Thanks for pointing out the problem, we are putting it on our list.

      Kind regards,
      Jin

       
    • Peter Enzerink

      Peter Enzerink - 2006-03-20

      The problem with libupnp seems to the same problem in mediatomb; they use the default stat structure which can't handle files bigger than 2GB. The easy fix seems to be to define a compile flag that tells the compiler to use stat struct that can handle larger file sizes. I'm having a fiddle with that right now.

      Cheers

       
    • Jin

      Jin - 2006-03-20

      Well, I doubt that it will be so easy... it's not just about the stat structure.

      Take a look at fseek and llseek functions, at least from what I understand fseek can only handle 2GB, while llseek is written to handle bigger files.

      When the 2GB question was first asked on the forum Gena did check it out, and from what he found out it seemed not such an easy fix. Let me know about your findings, maybe we indeed missed something...

      Thanks,
      Jin

       
      • Peter Enzerink

        Peter Enzerink - 2006-03-21

        Yeah it rapidly becomes obvious there is plenty to fix. I'll chip away at it a bit and if I turn up anything worthwhile I'll make some notes.

         
    • Jin

      Jin - 2006-03-21

      Yep :>
      Just for testing I tried to compile MediaTomb with the flags you mentioned; I got warnings that those flags were redefined - and that happened within some system headers. So there is indeed plenty to fix, I guess other file seek/stat/etc. functions have to be used.

       
    • Per Larsson

      Per Larsson - 2006-04-15

      Regarding this issue, I was just wondering if MediaTomb development is still happening? I tried cheking out the CVS but it seems empty.

      I have a rather buggy UPnP renderer (the Acer AT3705MGW) and I've tried uShare, gmediaserver, Twonky and MediaTomb and of those only MT works well. My UPnP renderer has major problems talking to the other media servers so for me it would be a disaster if MediaTomb had stopped development.

      Since I have some HDTV content I'd like to play the 2GB filesize limit is really annoying.

      Now, don't take this as negative criticism. I think MT is great as it is, and I really appreciate the developers for releasing it freely under the GNU GPL.

       
    • Jin

      Jin - 2006-04-15

      Hi,

      I fully aggree that the 2GB limit is very annoying, and I can assure you that MediaTomb has not stopped development.
      I have to admit that there was quite a pause - Gena,  a co-developer moved to another country and it seems that he will not be able to participate on full basis. Right now I brought another friend of mine into the project, so things will get going again.

      Btw, the CVS is indeed empty - we do not use the SourceForge CVS but use our own subversion server. We have thoughts about moving to SourceForge SVN but for now we stick with our local server.

      So we're not dead :) But we still need more time and have quite some work ahead of us.

      Greetings,
      Jin

       

Log in to post a comment.

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

JavaScript is required for this form.





No, thanks