After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 354883 - GParamSpecs of type GUINT give G_MAXUINT as -1
GParamSpecs of type GUINT give G_MAXUINT as -1
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 353943
Product: GStreamer
Classification: Platform
Component: gst-python
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: git master
Assigned To: GStreamer Maintainers
Johan (not receiving bugmail) Dahlin
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2006-09-08 02:13 UTC by René Stadler
Modified: 2006-10-06 17:54 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description René Stadler 2006-09-08 02:13:47 UTC
Taking a property of the "queue" element as an example:

$ gst-inspect-0.10 queue
[...]
Element Properties:
[...]
  current-level-buffers: Current number of buffers in the queue
                        flags: readable
                        Unsigned Integer. Range: 0 - 4294967295 Default: 0
[...]

Trying the same introspection in python:
>>> import pygst; pygst.require ("0.10"); import gobject, gst
>>> specs = gobject.list_properties (gst.element_factory_make ("queue"))
>>> specs[1]
<GParamUInt 'current-level-buffers'>
>>> specs[1].maximum
-1

This is on a 32-bit platform, if that matters.  GINTs seem to work ok, for example textoverlay::deltax (min: -2147483648, max: 2147483647).
Comment 1 René Stadler 2006-09-08 02:42:43 UTC
cutter::run-length is a guint64 whose max value of 18446744073709551615 comes out as -1L.

audiotestsrc::timestamp-offset is an example of a gint64 with range -9223372036854775808 to 9223372036854775807. pygst reports min 0L, max -1L.
Comment 2 Stefan Sauer (gstreamer, gtkdoc dev) 2006-10-02 18:29:26 UTC
sounds like a problem in the python bindings
Comment 3 René Stadler 2006-10-02 18:59:21 UTC
This should probably move to pygobject.  I assume gtk+ doesn't really use 64 bit integers in properties, so this bug was undetected all the time.
Comment 4 René Stadler 2006-10-02 20:07:58 UTC
Looks like a dup of bug #353943.
Comment 5 René Stadler 2006-10-06 17:54:55 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 353943 ***