binary VLC compiled with hardware acceleration failed to unrar

I suspect you may have a bad download.

I just downloaded that file and unrar'd it on a Debian 7 i386 PC with no errors. It reported "All OK" at the end.

To help you check your download, mine was 319,009,008 bytes long and the MD5 sum was 4717cf58a942d1d9a711b9dec52c8899

Running Ubuntu 14.04 here - I extracted the archive with no errors, using both Unrar 5.0 and 7zip/Wine.

Thanks for that byte count and MD5 sum. My download matches both but still won't unrar with the unrar-free that comes with Debian Wheezy, version 0.0.1+cvs20071127-2. That looks like a terribly old version. Hmmmm, it worked with your 32-bit i386 but failed with my 64-bit--maybe a bug manifest only in 64 bits.

FWIW, at the moment, my second Pi is compiling from source, using the tutorial here:

The tutorial at intensecode.blogspot.de is missing a few things.

If that effort fails, I'll keep in mind to try a newer version of unrar on the binary archive.

Thanks,

Ah, I see. I'm using the non-free version of unrar 1:4.1.4-1 from Wheezy. That must be the issue.

What is hardware-acceleration [in the context of display technology]?

If you can't explain, DON'T post a link.

I'm tired of "technical explanations" that consist of references to personalities.

Have a look at .

Per Wikipedia:

"In computing, hardware acceleration is the use of computer hardware to perform some functions faster than is possible in software running on the general-purpose CPU. Examples of hardware acceleration include blitting acceleration functionality in graphics processing units (GPUs) and instructions for complex operations in CPUs."

That explanation (which is the first one you'd find in a Google search for 'hardware acceleration') not only describes the general concept, but also gives a specific example of using a graphics processing unit, which thus is an example "in the context of display technology".

Finding this explanation was absolutely trivial.

Perhaps you should take your own advice but in reverse: If you can't even be bothered to do a simple search where the very first result gives an explanation, DON'T post a question.

And lots of people are tired of questions that can be answered by doing a trivial search on your favourite search engine.

Because of this, most of us here now ignore the unknown dog.

What can you expect when he's using the quoted text third hand in a reply to a reply posting in response to the original text in the OP instead of the OP itself? :-(

Please do not feed the troll.

h.264