PDA

View Full Version : ffp help


tendernip99
2006-09-18, 12:20 PM
Should you make another ffp to verify flacs before you burn them. Let's says you have a show whose ffps aren't archived on a site like etree. Should you make that extra ffp to ensure that nothing changed during the burning process, or does the test/full ffp vrf feature in TLH handle this for you?

TheMamba
2006-09-18, 12:37 PM
Usually (when I'm not being ultra lazy or in a rush), I make the FFP's and then burn them on the disc with the FLAC's. When the burn is done, I verify the files on the burned disc.

tendernip99
2006-09-18, 01:08 PM
I don't know if you understood my question. Let's say you make another ffp before you burn the flacs, but you don't burn that ffp to disc, only the original. Now after the discs are burned, should you use the ffp you made before you burned the flacs to verify nothing changed. I'd like to think all you have to do is run a simple test or full ffp vrf in TLH.

Is it even possible for a ffp to become corrupt during the burning process?

RetroDude83
2006-09-18, 01:20 PM
Is it even possible for a ffp to become corrupt during the burning process?

a ffp file is nothing else than a .txt file, with the flac fingerprints in it. should it get corrupt for some reason, you can simply open the ffp with notepad and copy the text into a new .txt file and then rename it to .ffp (e.g. rename 1991-02-02.txt to 1991.-02-02.ffp). all waht TLH is doing is comparing the chesums of the flac files with the ffp file, it's basicly reading the ffp of the .txt/.ffp. but well, the ffp files are tiny as nothing so there will be no way way they get corrupt during burning processes i think, and if they do than the whole disc will be fucked anyway...

TheMamba
2006-09-18, 01:33 PM
I don't know if you understood my question. Let's say you make another ffp before you burn the flacs, but you don't burn that ffp to disc, only the original. Now after the discs are burned, should you use the ffp you made before you burned the flacs to verify nothing changed. I'd like to think all you have to do is run a simple test or full ffp vrf in TLH.

Is it even possible for a ffp to become corrupt during the burning process?

Oh, Ok. Yeah, it is possible for any file that gets burned to disc to be corrupted. Just double check the files you burned vs. the ones on your hard drive before you delete them off your hard drive and you'll be OK.

RetroDude83
2006-09-18, 01:41 PM
by the way, what I'm doing also to have the fingerprints twice, I copy the fingerprints into the info file sraight from TLH

like this:
cure1986-08-09_d1t01.flac:4f28e04eaadc88fb8403ad81f2a2e1ab
cure1986-08-09_d1t02.flac:53818ff4eaeb46a6316a39c760a0791a
...etc.

and I keep the info on my hd also...

Five
2006-09-18, 01:43 PM
something to realize about FLAC and ffp is that every FLAC file contains one ffp checksum in its header. so testing a ffp just reads what's in the ffp file and compares it to what's in the header of each FLAC file in the list, without checking anything else. In order to truely check the FLAC files, test mode must be used, which decompresses the audio in each FLAC file and compares it to what it written in its own header as being the correct checksum. st5 also checks the decompressed audio data, but not against the checksum in the header but rather against what is written in the st5 file (which is a txt file like a ffp).

is that confusing enough? :lol

in a nutshell, testing via ffp is not enouh, also use test mode on FLAC files, or test using st5 and ffp for full verification.

there's a tutorial in my signature that covers most of the nitty-gritty.

hope this helps

tendernip99
2006-09-18, 03:22 PM
Thank you all for the help.

tendernip99
2006-09-18, 03:42 PM
I should have added this to my previous post...

If you run a full ffp verification on the flacs you just burned in TLH with no errors, is it even necessary to test them against the ones on your hard drive?

Five
2006-09-18, 04:17 PM
perhaps I didn't make it clear... ffp verification is of very little value for testing files, it is mainly a way of identifying filesets. if you want to test the files you burned you have to run either test mode or st5 verification (md5 will also work but is no longer in common use for audio sets).

tendernip99
2006-09-18, 04:23 PM
perhaps I didn't make it clear... ffp verification is of very little value for testing files, it is mainly a way of identifying filesets. if you want to test the files you burned you have to run either test mode or st5 verification (md5 will also work but is no longer in common use for audio sets).

:thumbsup

tendernip99
2006-09-18, 08:31 PM
perhaps I didn't make it clear... ffp verification is of very little value for testing files, it is mainly a way of identifying filesets. if you want to test the files you burned you have to run either test mode or st5 verification (md5 will also work but is no longer in common use for audio sets).

After thinking about it...what is the point of having an ffp in your fileset? If you download a show and they test okay, well, doesn't that mean it's an exact set? The same for after burning your flacs, wouldn't they be exact if they tested o.k.? In your response you say a ffp is mainly for identifying filesets. Can't you just identify a fileset by the source info?

Five
2006-09-19, 01:32 AM
ffp is mainly for the convenience of viewing the contents of the FLAC headers of the fileset. st5 is really much better to include because it runs a full test when executed from TLH and while the formatting is different, the 32-character hash will be the same as what's in the ffp. st5 also works with SHN and APE, unlike ffp (this is also a key advantage over md5).

roann
2006-09-19, 03:04 AM
something to realize about FLAC and ffp is that every FLAC file contains one ffp checksum in its header. so testing a ffp just reads what's in the ffp file and compares it to what's in the header of each FLAC file in the list, without checking anything else. In order to truely check the FLAC files, test mode must be used, which decompresses the audio in each FLAC file and compares it to what it written in its own header as being the correct checksum. st5 also checks the decompressed audio data, but not against the checksum in the header but rather against what is written in the st5 file (which is a txt file like a ffp).

is that confusing enough?

in a nutshell, testing via ffp is not enouh, also use test mode on FLAC files, or test using st5 and ffp for full verification.
perhaps I didn't make it clear... ffp verification is of very little value for testing files, it is mainly a way of identifying filesets. if you want to test the files you burned you have to run either test mode or st5 verification (md5 will also work but is no longer in common use for audio sets).
This is a very common misunderstanding if/when you're using Trader's Little Helper. If you've selected Full Verify in the Preferences section (this is the default setting in the lastest release, in the previous release you have to check the box on the Verify ... page) each flac file will be decoded, the fingerprint for the decoded audio data will be re-calculated, and the re-calculated checksum will be checked a) against the fingerprint stored in the header of the flac file and b) against the fingerprint given in the checksum file. So there is absolutely no need to test the flac files (testing a flac file means doing all the steps already done during verification, that is decoding, re-calculating the checksum of the raw audio data, and comparing the checksum to that stored in the flac file header).

@<hidden>: You really should read the manual as I told you ...

Five
2006-09-19, 04:32 AM
thanks for clarifying roann

I downloaded the latest version today & look forward to exploring the latest improvements and manual

full verify is a brilliant idea, thanks for this and all the work you do to make TLH the greatest app available for traders :clap:

roann
2006-09-19, 06:19 AM
thanks for clarifying roann

I downloaded the latest version today & look forward to exploring the latest improvements and manual

full verify is a brilliant idea, thanks for this and all the work you do to make TLH the greatest app available for traders :clap:
You're welcome :) ...

tendernip99
2006-09-19, 08:34 AM
@<hidden>: You really should read the manual as I told you ...

I did read the manual. I'm probably just making it harder than it has to be.