search

wiztrust / php-reader

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/php-reader
0 stars 0 forks source link

Failing to detect id3v2.2 tag #61

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
php-reader fails to read some files tags.

Example:

Found by cli tool id3v2:

MacBook-Pro-de-Mickael-Desfrenes:breaks mickael$ id3v2 -l _Baobinga\ -\ the\ 
bashment\ track.mp3
id3v2 tag info for _Baobinga - the bashment track.mp3:
TT2 (Title/songname/content description): the bashment track
TP1 (Lead performer(s)/Soloist(s)): Baobinga
TCO (Content type): break (255)

Not found by php-reader:

Exception: File does not contain ID3v2 tag of supported version: v2.2

I understand v2.2 is considered obsolete but many files still come with it.

Example mp3 is bigger than 10MB so I can't attach it here, but I can provide a 
link to it.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by desfrenes on 13 Aug 2011 at 2:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
ID3v2.2 tags are not currently supported by the library. There is actually a 
check in the constructor for if ($this->_header->getVersion() < 3 || 
$this->_header->getVersion() > 4) then throw exception.

I cannot remember for sure what was the reason why 2.2 was not originally 
supported but it was probably due to the major differences between the formats 
and that it was obsolete.

You can always try to make the necessary changes into the library and then 
provide us a patch that we can apply to the subversion. Start by removing the 
check from the constructor and see what happens ;)

Original comment by svollbehr on 14 Aug 2011 at 6:43

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
I guess the main difference is v2.2 frames are only 3 letters (TT2 vs TIT2). I 
found using eyed3 (http://linux.die.net/man/1/eyed3) can convert all tags to 
v2.4. A bit slow on a 30k+ collection but it works and I don't have to do it 
twice.

You may close this, as it is very unlikely that I had support for v2.2 since 
converting to v2.4 is that easy and I understand it's not worth putting more 
energy into an obsolete format.

Thank you.

Original comment by desfrenes on 14 Aug 2011 at 8:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Good that you found out a way to do it!

Original comment by svollbehr on 14 Aug 2011 at 6:05