On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 10:50:46PM +0200, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
I used Andreas' tarball v 0.12 (which contains mkisofs) on a machine running
2.1.103, using -J -r (and -b, too), and it works fine... both 2.1.103 and
2.0.33 seem to prefer Joliet over RR, but I can see and use the symlinks on
i was told, that a bug with joilet+rr in 1.12* was fixed in 1.12a4,
but i would feel better with someone who has tested it.
I used the mkisofs you included in the tarball... which one is it? It
doesn't say...
it should be 1.12a4, the newest release. it's static compiled (so bo system
can
using mkisofs (the one Andreas includes) it worked just fine on a PC with a
QDI MB (it says something like Titanium IB+ TX... it's a 430TX chipset).
so the current mkisofs generates bootable cdroms ?
(i have to admin, i think i didn't change the mkisofs in 0.12, but i'm not
sure. maybe you can
I used Andreas' tarball v 0.12 (which contains mkisofs) on a machine running
2.1.103, using -J -r (and -b, too), and it works fine... both 2.1.103 and
2.0.33 seem to prefer Joliet over RR, but I can see and use the symlinks on
both systems... I pass no options to mount (fstab reads
On Thu, Jun 11, 1998 at 06:07:32PM +0200, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
sad news : after i created cdrom images with -J (joilet) option,
the symlinks were broken : plain 2.0.33 sees them as files,
but 2.0.34pre (with joilet patch) understands them.
Andreas, I don't know if this has been fixed,
On Thu, Jun 11, 1998 at 11:06:13PM +0200, Ronald Lembcke wrote:
I had the same problem with my selfburned hamm cd's...
the debian-hamm kernel seems to prefere joliet over
rockridge with mount -o nojoliet the symlinks worked...
I used Andreas' tarball v 0.12 (which contains mkisofs)
The stock kernel mounts this CD (mount -t auto /dev/hdd cdrom) as joliet...
it /spits:
The writer is installed on a machine running 2.1.103 (the support for my
controller is better with 2.1.10x), but I used the CD to freshly install
Debian on a couple of PC's and to upgrade my own computer.
Andreas == Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The stock kernel mounts this CD (mount -t auto /dev/hdd cdrom)
as joliet... it /spits:
The writer is installed on a machine running 2.1.103 (the
support for my controller is better with 2.1.10x), but I used
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the right place for this.
Don't you mean:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ronald another problem with joliet... a bug in mkisofs and
Ronald mkhybrid (at least in the newest available versioin
Ronald arround april 6th)
Ronald when you make a bootable cd with joliet _and_ rockridge
Ronald the information for the bios that it is a bootable cd is
On 11 Jun 1998, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
[]
So:
* We need a way to make the kernel prefer iso9660 with rock-ridge over
Joliet. The kernel currently prefers Joliet over iso9660 with
rock-ridge, so symlinks are invisible on CD-ROMs that are both
iso9660 and Joliet.
[]
I followed the
Philip Hands wrote:
I thought debian's 2.0.33 had the FAT32 patch. This is the same as the
joilet
stuff AFAIK. Does this mean that you are using a non-standard kernel or am
I
just totally wrong here?
i don't know what [EMAIL PROTECTED] is useing (no symlinks at his machine),
but
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Jun 12 10:34:48 1998
Ronald another problem with joliet... a bug in mkisofs and
Ronald mkhybrid (at least in the newest available versioin
Ronald arround april 6th)
Ronald when you make a bootable cd with joliet _and_ rockridge
Ronald the
Thomas == Thomas Hohenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thomas I followed the discussion above. I have two SuSE Linux
Thomas 2.0.33/2.0.34 systems. The first system has my cdrecorder
Thomas attached. I patched this one with the Joliet patch and a
Thomas 2k blocksize patch for my
Philip == Philip Hands [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the right place for this.
Philip
Philip Don't you mean:
Philip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
No, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a separate mailing list just for CD
burning software under unix.
--
sad news : after i created cdrom images with -J (joilet) option,
the symlinks were broken : plain 2.0.33 sees them as files,
but 2.0.34pre (with joilet patch) understands them.
i guess, i will have to create the official cdroms without joilet fs
support.
comments ?
andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
sad news : after i created cdrom images with -J (joilet) option,
the symlinks were broken : plain 2.0.33 sees them as files,
but 2.0.34pre (with joilet patch) understands them.
i guess, i will have to create the official cdroms without joilet fs
support.
sad news : after i created cdrom images with -J (joilet) option,
the symlinks were broken : plain 2.0.33 sees them as files,
but 2.0.34pre (with joilet patch) understands them.
i guess, i will have to create the official cdroms without joilet fs
support.
comments ?
I had the same problem
I thought debian's 2.0.33 had the FAT32 patch. This is the same as the joilet
stuff AFAIK. Does this mean that you are using a non-standard kernel or am I
just totally wrong here?
i don't know what [EMAIL PROTECTED] is useing (no symlinks at his machine),
but my own system is running 2.0.34pre15
I thought debian's 2.0.33 had the FAT32 patch. This is the same as the joilet
stuff AFAIK. Does this mean that you are using a non-standard kernel or am I
just totally wrong here?
i don't know what [EMAIL PROTECTED] is useing (no symlinks at his machine),
but my own system is running
20 matches
Mail list logo
