Joerg Schilling wrote:
Heiko Baums <li...@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
I mean I assume that you have a big technical knowledge. Otherwise you
wouldn't be able to write such a program and build such an Open Solaris
LiveCD. But I also can understand that some people feel being attacked
by you. On the other hand I can understand that you like to see
cdrtools in the repo instead of cdrkit since it is your and the
original software. And I'd also vote for switching from cdrkit to
cdrtools in the repos even if I generally don't mind with which program
I burn my CDs as long as the CDs are burned correctly.
It seems that you also use this discussion to attack me.
It would help a lot of you first try to understand what happened. A person
did make a claim about an alleged problem without giving any proof for his
claims. I asked him kindly to give enough information so in case there really
was a problem, I am able to explain where it is located.
Jörg
I don't think you "get it".
First of all, I don't care what happened when the split or fork
happened. It makes _ZERO_ difference to me.
This is what I have done because of _your_ direct actions on this list
and other actions by you on some news groups I read.
On the computers I have that run Slackware -12.2/13.0 I have removed
cdrtools and installed cdrkit.
Note that Slackware distributes cdrtools.
I don't care if cdrtools is better than the very best or that cdrkit is
worst than the worst. It doesn't matter.
I have preformed some tests and guess what cdrkit works! Imagine that.
It burnt the iso's for Slackware distribution, and using md5sum to sum
both a Slackware distribution disk burned by both cdrkit and cdrtools
and they are the same, how did that happen?
Going forward I will use cdrkit on any system that I have any
responsibilities on.
Thanks.
PS. I agree and support Arch Linux to distribute cdrkit.
