On 28 Oct 2003 15:27:12 -0600, Unforgiven <u@u.com> wrote:
:>Hi KH Again,
:>I just posted the crc and 000 files for my versions of Rbm/Rbv72
:>vids.They do not match each other at all. See if maybe one of them
:>matches what you have. If you would like me to post either of them,
:>just let me know.
And Hi back again, U -- ;o)
Hmmm... This gets curiouser. Your Rbm doesn't resemble mine anywhere.
Your Rbv matches on the nose through part 028, with no further
matches.
Your Rbm is short of mine by 8,947,839 bytes. A humungous diff. OTOH,
your Rbv is short by only 180,790 bytes. I begin to suspect that your
Rbv is a corrupted copy of my Rbm...
Your two are *effectively* the same vid, right? Except the Rbm doesn't
play as long? If so, then the Rbm may have been chopped and re-encoded
somewhere along the line. Or something. Looks to me like the one to
pursue is your Rbv.
I tried cutting 180,790 bytes and creating a new part 028, but it
still didn't match yours, meaning the losses occurred in more than one
place. (Nutz!) If you'll post your 028 thru 030 or so (for the Rbv),
I'll look for a start point in my own, and "maybe" I can make a patch
for it. If I can, then we can see how far it goes before the next
mismatch.
If just a few small patches can make your Rbv equal my Rbm, then we'll
have proven that it was never anything but a renamed "almost right"
copy. It may also prove that the Rbm as posted, that you and many
others have, is a really seriously trashed version of the original.
Could be interesting...
Take care, and see ya.
KH NP-b54
The day Micro$oft produces something that doesn't suck
will be the day they start producing vacuum cleaners.
|
|