Disney+ 6230 breaks this module - error 702

[MrGrackle]

Star Wars Young Jedi Adventures, download S01E21 with 6229, no problems.
Update to 6230, S01E22 gets error 702 every time.
Revert to 6229, S01E22 success.
Update to 6230, S01E23 clean install, failed, error 702.
Revert to 6229, success.

Do you see where this is going?

And as mentioned in the other thread I opened about processing time taking longer... download speeds are also significantly slower on 6230.

Attaching logs from each version to show what might be going on.

[MrGrackle]

Wilson.Wang I also submitted this info to the official support channel.

[Germania]

Looks okay until remux but then

[DownloadDisney]" "output file not exist :0 (Unknown error)

Works fine for me in NYC | so from the same: vod-akc-na-east-1.media.dssott.com

selection:


result:

[MrGrackle]

Germania did you get to the part where it saved the video? Are you using mp4 or mkv?
I tried a clean install this go round to see if it actually resolves anything, which it did not. Which also reinforces my cynicism that requiring a fresh install on every version release is a waste of time.

[Germania]

Germania did you get to the part where it saved the video?

Of course - otherwise it where not in Downloaded


> Are you using mp4 or mkv?

I saw mp4 in your 6230 log - so i used this (my default) ..
.. but shouldn't make a difference, because mkv also uses mp4box
with 6230 - even if that doesn't make sense => see also here
(it's the same mp4 with extension mkv)

[MrGrackle]

Of course - otherwise it where not in Downloaded


> Are you using mp4 or mkv?

I saw mp4 in your 6230 log - so i used this (my default) ..
.. but shouldn't make a difference, because mkv also uses mp4box
with 6230 - even if that doesn't make sense => see also here
(it's the same mp4 with extension mkv)

This time around, I once again did a full clean and reinstall, but did ONE thing differently this time. I did NOT replace mkvmerge and mp4box executables. And lo and behold, it worked. I remember Cats4U did the standard disclaimer because you never know what changing shit around does, always sound advice, because, you know.
Mp4box, the one that gets installed is 6567Kb while the latest build out in the wild is 420Kb.
Mkvmerge, version 68 is installed at 14,644Kb while version 90 is 16,459Kb.

Just now I replaced mkvmerge to V90 again, I kind of doubt either executable broke it but maybe (?!)

[Germania]

I did NOT replace mkvmerge and mp4box executables. And lo and behold, it worked

I can confirm:

Original in SF is: MP4Box - GPAC version 2.2.1-revrelease
I tried again with MP4Box - GPAC version 2.3-DEV and get same unknown error 702
and of course with MP4Box - GPAC version 2.4-rev0 and get same unknown error 702

[Cats4U]

I can confirm:

Original in SF is: MP4Box - GPAC version 2.2.1-revrelease
I tried again with MP4Box - GPAC version 2.3-DEV and get same unknown error 702
and of course with MP4Box - GPAC version 2.4-rev0 and get same unknown error 702

What about the latest nightly, gpac-2.5-DEV-rev1423-gf87b3061-master-x64.exe (aka gpac_latest_head_win64.exe)? That's the one I use. I don't subscribe to Disney+ therefore I can't test it myself.
I've always been suspicious of the size difference of the versions of MP4Box, but since I didn't get any errors, I've gone with the very latest version up to now. This might be a reason to stick with SF's version. I just wish I knew where they got that version from, as it doesn't match anything I've seen so far. I can only find GPAC 2.2.1 as source code, and I'm not about to start compiling as I'm not a developer.

[Cats4U]

I just wish I knew where they got that version from, as it doesn't match anything I've seen so far. I can only find GPAC 2.2.1 as source code, and I'm not about to start compiling as I'm not a developer.

Wait! I just found a compiled version of GPAC 2.2.1 on https://www.videohelp.com/software/MP4Box/old-versions. I'll check it out and see what's what. I wonder if SF modified the source code and compiled, or they used it straight. StreamFab doesn't seem to use/contain the full GPAC package, just MP4Box from it.

[Germania]

All this *.master.exe have mp4box.exe < 1MB ..
.. these are not standalone exe and can't show the version without the dll's

To build on Windows, you'll need:
* Git
* Visual Studio (at least VS2015 is recommended)

For a full build, other tools might be required, they will be mentioned at the time. {source}

GPAC build MP4Box only

btw: My tested (standalone) 2.3-DEV is > 6,5 MB

[Cats4U]

Yeah, I don't intend to build anything. The Videohelp 2.2.1's already compiled version doesn't have a standalone MP4Box.exe either, as you said. Which is not a problem, cause GPAC is in Window's PATH and all the dlls are there. I just can't tell whether SF is using a modified MP4Box.exe or not. It really doesn't matter now because I decided to keep using the SF version of MP4Box due to the obvious 702 errors that are happening. Maybe after the 2.5 release becomes stable, I'll get someone to run a test on it.

[Germania]

If anyone could tell me what is supposed to be better
or faster with a newer mp4box.exe in SF ..
.. then please enlighten me

[Cats4U]

I'm not here to defend any version of MP4Box. Heck, I don't even use MP4s unless I'm forced into it. I greatly prefer MKVs. As for why I want the latest versions, if possible, time provides more experience. Things get fixed over time. Security issues are a big problem. Microsoft has made a fortune claiming that you need to buy the latest version from them because they're not going to fix all the security bugs they created with the last version you have, for free anymore. Now they added on a little twist in that your almost new computer isn't good enough to run their software, so buy a new computer. If it weren't for security, I'd still be using NT. That was a fine OS (which was written primarily by IBM).
Back to GPAC, the version SF uses (2.2.1) is a "security release" according to GitHub. Look at https://github.com/gpac/gpac/releases/tag/v2.2.1, just to see how many security fixes were taken care of since 2.2.0. If that many were fixed in 2.2.1, what about the upcoming 2.5? Hopefully, now, you are enlightened to my way of thinking. If SF was a completely proprietary program, it would be different, but in reality it is probably 95% off the shelf parts. Why wouldn't you use the newest versions of those parts if it is just a matter of slapping them in there?

[Germania]

Hopefully, now, you are enlightened to my way of thinking.

SF use mp4box not online - only locally ..
.. and mostly all vulnerabilities require attacking locally

Why would SF abuse outdated mp4box for this?
It would be much easier to hide in StreamFab64.exe or QCef.exe ..
.. and python37 has significantly more attack surface


btw:
> I don't even use MP4s unless I'm forced into it.

But it doesn't matter if SF 6230 ignores the mkv (ffmpeg/mkmerge) settings for D+ and always uses mp4box

[Cats4U]

Whatever. Either you are making a mistranslation of what I wrote or are intentionally twisting my words around for reasons unknown.

Back to radio silence. But not for your defense this time.