Re: cdrecord-ProDVD
Joerg Schilling wrote: From: Dan Hollis [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Plamen Neykov wrote: I know it is a stupid question, but ... Do I still have to use cdrecord-prodvd to record DVD-R's or it is possible just to use the normal version of cdrecord? If you have pioneer DVDRW (A103,A104,103,104), you can use dvdrtools. http://www.freesoftware.fsf.org/dvdrtools/ It's an independent code fork of cdrtools. Please don't be unfair... This is not an independant fork of cdrtools! It is rather an _unmaintained_ snapshot that uses an add on which most likely has been created by reverse engineering cdrecord-ProDVD. Give me a better explanagtion why the hell the patch this beast is related on appeard about a week after I announced my first test binary and about two weeks after I put the binary on the server. Keeping in mind that is is a 100 line patch and that the first binary test version of cdrecord-ProDVD did not come with -V disabled... You also should non be unfair Is rather that you have posted the prodvd version on the website one week after I anounced that I'm working on a version of cdrecord that supports A103 drive. I had no problem implementing support for DAO mode, it is rather simple if you read the necessary documentation. But I had problems implementing multisession support.Keiji Katata from Pioneer Japan was the one that helped me in implementing this driver. But it was no magic, like you said I only did 10% of the job, the rest was already done in cdrecord. mache -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
Finally a well said answer without flaming, completely opposed to Jörg unfriendly comments. Congratulations. Best wishes Norbert --- Norbert Preining preining AT logic DOT at Technische Universität Wien gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094 --- BOOK...Man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much... the wheel, New York, wars, and so on, whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely the dolphins believed themselves to be more intelligent than man for precisely the same reasons. --- Douglas Adams, The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote: Look at the web page and judge yourself. The first thing that comes into mind is the 'pay' button. Actually the sole reason I placed it there is to show people you can ask users to contribute without violating the GPL. If people find it offensive, I'll just remove it -- there, done. I didn't find it offensive at all. I was happy to find open source dvd writing program for my Pioneer 104. I gladly donate money to open source program, so I don't have to worry about a closed binary-only with license key that might shutdown on certain date depending on the mood of the author. And for the record joerg, if you had a paypal donate button for the open source cdrecord, I would donate for that too. I won't support closed-source binaries though. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Plamen Neykov) Hi Guys, I know it is a stupid question, but ... Do I still have to use cdrecord-prodvd to record DVD-R's or it is possible just to use the normal version of cdrecord? As the GPL does not prvent DW thiefs from taking my source and making prorietary SW out of it, it makes no sense to make sources GPL if they are leading edge. What is your problem with cdrecord-ProDVD? Jörg EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am Jorg Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 12 10:50:54 2002 On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Dan Hollis wrote: joerg is calling you a thief... This is not true! I never used this word in my mail Thanks for notifying me. He should reconsider this, because the only theft in this whole mess wasn't what I did. ??? Interesting to see that you are not completely unwilling to communicate cdrecord is a GPLed software, and contains contributions from people other than him, and those people did not sign a copyright signover of any kind. So by running his own proprietary fork of it, he is violating the GPL on parts of the code (including a couple of mostly oneliner patches by me, and I'm sure that I for one do *not* agree with any of my code being used in proprietary software.). Plese contact a lawyer before making such false claims: Read the law that is important for this case: Cdrecord has completely been written in Germany. The German / European Copyright law (better let us call it Autorship rights law as the US people otherwise would missunderstand us because thay only have a Copyright law) is what applies here. Yes I did get contributions, but this was less than 5% in total and far less than 1% for the Linux or Solaris version. The Autorship rights law is dealing with a so called work and _not_ with single lines of code. In addition there is some principles of law that deal with accumulation of property which apply because there is not even a single source file that includes contributed code in a way that it dominates over the aount of my intellectual property found in this file. For this reason I am the original Author of cdrecord and _do_ have the right to publish it with any Licence I like. For the parts that are not critical code because the know how is widely spread, I choosed the GPL and for the parts where I am on the leading edge (cdrecord_ProDVD was the 3rd DVD-recording application world wide in February 1998) I keep the sources secret. I _am_ getting roughly one request to help other people from India, China or Russia for free to write their CDR program so I am sure that even CD recording is of high interest for many companies that like to cdreate a complete closed source solution. Let's look at his other accusations: This is not an independant fork of cdrtools! It sort of is. It's intended to be a free fork closely following the development of cdrtools, which happens to be a great piece of software for writing CDs. It's just too bad there are no plans to add DVD support in a legal version thereof, so it's time for someone else to do it. Cdrecord-ProDVD is a legal DVDD writing program what is your problem? In addition: Why do _you_ claim this and never tried to contact me before? You cannot know what you are talking of because you did not ask me! You can claim it's not really independant because it doesn't contain all that many changes to the cdrtools code, and you'd be somewhat right - I just added DVD support and fixed up [IMO -- see below] the build system. You did not fix it but you destroy the build system. You replaced a completely automated build system that allows you to compile on far more than 30 different OS by something worse. Why? If it ever becomes necessary, it can become a truly independant fork, though. I just hope it won't get that far. ??? It is rather an _unmaintained_ snapshot It is true that I haven't released many updates lately. This is mostly because I'm busy with other work, and because the current version works perfectly for me. Let us call it this way: After you fixed the worse bugs in YOUR build system that caused cdrecord to dump core you stopped working on it. I will release a newer version once I either have some spare time, or once I find a serious problem in the current version. You name it! You are a person who did make useless changes on the build system for unknown reasons and your only motivation was to have a private copy of cdrecord running for your A03. This way we never will get good and powerfull free software. that uses an add on which most likely has been created by reverse engineering cdrecord-ProDVD. For the record, it hasn't been. I believe proprietary software is evil, therefore I don't download it. So you don't use CVS which us proprietary software because it uses a non-standard archive format? So you use star rather than GNU tar because GNU tar ignores standard and writes in a proprietary data format? Stay reasonable Give me a better explanagtion why the hell the patch this beast is related on appeard about a week after I announced my first test binary and about two weeks after I put the binary on the server. Coincidence. I happened to buy a DVD writer than, and wanted it to work. If you don't believe me, I can scan the invoice. This does not seem to be relates to my
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 12 11:19:36 2002 And for the record joerg, if you had a paypal donate button for the open source cdrecord, I would donate for that too. If somebofy helps me to set up an account why not. The main difference between me and the RH Germany guy seems to be that I am really busy with writing Free Software and don't have the time to look for things like paypal. I won't support closed-source binaries though. If you like to protect leading edge SW you sometimes need. Look what is going on with ghostview Jörg EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am Jorg Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: What is your problem with cdrecord-ProDVD? It's closed source binary-only with a license key and timebomb (June 17). Is it any wonder people might prefer the open source one? -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: Interesting to see that you are not completely unwilling to communicate I'm not - I just end up being unresponsive occasionally because I'm overworked (and receiving around 1500 mails a day doesn't help). For this reason I am the original Author of cdrecord and _do_ have the right to publish it with any Licence I like. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to debate it, though I think it's questionable because you can assume the patches you applied were implicitly placed under the GPL. Even if it happens to be legal, it is ethically wrong IMO; you have abused the contributors' trust and used their work in ways they (or at least some of them) don't agree with. This is precisely the reason why I've forked it. I don't want to see any of my code used in proprietary software, and I'm sure many others feel the same way. For the parts that are not critical code because the know how is widely spread, I choosed the GPL and for the parts where I am on the leading edge (cdrecord_ProDVD was the 3rd DVD-recording application world wide in February 1998) I keep the sources secret. If you don't use other people's code, that's your choice of course. It's my choice to dislike this sort of thing enough to do something about it. Cdrecord-ProDVD is a legal DVDD writing program what is your problem? 1. I believed it's illegal because of a GPL violation (and I'm still not 100% convinced it isn't one) 2. Even if it is legal, it's proprietary software, and therefore shouldn't be used. You can claim it's not really independant because it doesn't contain all that many changes to the cdrtools code, and you'd be somewhat right - I just added DVD support and fixed up [IMO -- see below] the build system. You did not fix it but you destroy the build system. You replaced a completely automated build system that allows you to compile on far more than 30 different OS by something worse. Why? Because I (and many others) like it better. Better/worse are rather subjective terms. My main arguments for preferring using the GNU build tools are: - It's the standard way of doing things. Therefore, other people can read it and immediately know what it means without having to read up on loads of different makefiles. - It makes life easier for packagers because it supports stuff like make install DESTDIR=/foo - It makes life easier for people trying to compile from source. ./configure --help |less ; ./configure --whatever is much easier than having to read a number of makefiles in different directories and editing them by hand, especially for non-programmers. - It automatically adapts to new OSes and OS versions rather than hardcoding Linux does things that way (assumptions which may not even be true on all Linux systems) the way your build system does in a few places. I'm sure you have a couple of good reasons to prefer your system as well. Let's just agree to disagree on this one, it's really another vi vs. emacs, Linux vs. GNU/Linux or Open Source vs. Free Software flamewar topics. If it ever becomes necessary, it can become a truly independant fork, though. I just hope it won't get that far. ??? Just in case all of cdrecord gets under an unacceptable license at some point. I hope it doesn't happen, but if it does, I'm prepared to run a truly independant fork without any code merges. It is true that I haven't released many updates lately. This is mostly because I'm busy with other work, and because the current version works perfectly for me. Let us call it this way: After you fixed the worse bugs in YOUR build system that caused cdrecord to dump core you stopped working on it. This is plain not true. I just decided to do some other things first when I had it in a working state. I already work about 15 hours/day, 7 days/week, so I admittedly can't do as much as I'd like to. I will release a newer version once I either have some spare time, or once I find a serious problem in the current version. You name it! You are a person who did make useless changes on the build system for unknown reasons s/useless/useful/, reasons see above. and your only motivation was to have a private copy of cdrecord running for your A03. Wrong. If that had been my motivation, I would have built a copy for myself without putting it on the net. Yes, I wanted to have my A03 running without using proprietary software. Then I put it on the net to help people in similar situations, and to encourage people with different hardware to extend it so it works with that. This way we never will get good and powerfull free software. This is wrong. Remember how Linux started out? Linus wanted a unixlike OS that worked on his 386. He put it on the net, and the rest is history. You can get good and powerful free software by putting stuff in works for me state on the net. You can NOT get good and powerful free software by
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 12 20:26:55 2002 On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: What is your problem with cdrecord-ProDVD? It's closed source binary-only with a license key and timebomb (June 17). It makes sense to check assumptions before posting it is limited to Jan 15 2003 Jörg EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am Jorg Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: Look what is going on with ghostview What's going on? (i dont use ghostview) If you don't know this story, why then did you join this discussion? Because you brought up ghostview at the very end of the discussion. You're asking me why I joined the beginning of a discussion based on an arbitrary condition you imposed at the very ending of the discussion? Maybe there's a communication gap because english isn't your primary language. Your arguments are not making any sense to me... Ghostview is closed source and old versions are distributed under something smilar to GPL. So it's justification to keep cdrecord-prodvd closed source? -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 12 21:01:01 2002 On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: I will release a newer version once I either have some spare time, or once I find a serious problem in the current version. You name it! You are a person who did make useless changes on the build system for unknown reasons and your only motivation was to have a private copy of cdrecord running for your A03. This way we never will get good and powerfull free software. He released his source code to the public. It doesn't have any license keys, it doesn't have any timebombs (June 17). Again: he did not contribute a single line of own code and the key expires on Jan 12th 2003 - just check before posting! You stated one reason to keep cdrecord-prodvd secret is to prevent companies to steal the code and put in some closed source application. But dvdtools is now there, open source, and anyone can see the magic code to write DVDs. It does only implement about 1/4th od DVD related code compared to what's in cdrecord-ProDVD.. For parts of it, there is no similar code in any other known software. You see, it protects. Is there really any reason to keep cdrecord-prodvd closed source anymore? The genie is out of the bottle so to speak. See above... Cdrtools come with a standard build system! But it doesn't write DVDs... Cdrecord-ProDVD does write DVDs with more different drives than the so called free one and runs on more different OS because it does not use a broken autoconfiguration. Jörg EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am Jorg Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: He released his source code to the public. It doesn't have any license keys, it doesn't have any timebombs (June 17). Again: he did not contribute a single line of own code and the key expires on Jan 12th 2003 - just check before posting! ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix/cdrecord/ProDVD/README As I am not sure if people will follow my licensing rules, so these keys are time limited and will expire on June 17th. ^ Cdrtools come with a standard build system! But it doesn't write DVDs... Cdrecord-ProDVD does write DVDs with more different drives than the so called free one and runs on more different OS because it does not use a broken autoconfiguration. But cdrecord-prodvd is not open source, so end users can't port it even if they want to. They're completely at the mercy of the single author who decides which platforms it gets binary-only release, and which not. -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 12 21:56:49 2002 Interesting to see that you are not completely unwilling to communicate I'm not - I just end up being unresponsive occasionally because I'm overworked (and receiving around 1500 mails a day doesn't help). Well I did expect that you start such a commnication because it sweems that you like to know something about the cdrecord-ProDVD status. You definitely did not... For this reason I am the original Author of cdrecord and _do_ have the right to publish it with any Licence I like. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not going to debate it, though I think it's questionable because you can assume the patches you applied were implicitly placed under the GPL. So you definitely make false assumptions! The German/European Copyright/Authorship righs law only protects a work and no code fragments. Code fragments are not worth to be protected from our law. Even if it happens to be legal, it is ethically wrong IMO; you have abused the contributors' trust and used their work in ways they (or at least some of them) don't agree with. You missinterpret what happens. The reallity is: All contributed code is freely available under GPL. What I am doing is simply a second legal type of use. I am the original Author and have the right to make a second publication under a different license. The whole ethic background of the GPL (giving the user unlimited access and right to use the source) is retained this way. This is precisely the reason why I've forked it. I don't want to see any of my code used in proprietary software, and I'm sure many others feel the same way. 1) It seems that you missinterpret the meaning of proprietary software 2) publishing under GPL definitely does not prevent your code from being used by non GPLd software. Cdrecord-ProDVD is a legal DVDD writing program what is your problem? 1. I believed it's illegal because of a GPL violation (and I'm still not 100% convinced it isn't one) It definitely does neither violate GPL nor the German/European Copyrights 2. Even if it is legal, it's proprietary software, and therefore shouldn't be used. Again, it seems that you use proprietary software like GNU tar and others. So what is your problem? You did not fix it but you destroy the build system. You replaced a completely automated build system that allows you to compile on far more than 30 different OS by something worse. Why? Because I (and many others) like it better. Better/worse are rather subjective terms. And you seem not to understand that there are many important things that just work more simple and more smoothly than what FSF programs usually do. My main arguments for preferring using the GNU build tools are: - It's the standard way of doing things. Therefore, other people can read it and immediately know what it means without having to read up on loads of different makefiles. Sorry your definition of the word standard seems to be broken the same way as it is when used by M$ people. Why do so many FSF followers behave the same way as their putative worst enemy does? A standard is something that has been aggreed on by an independant gremium. This is definitely not true for M$ or FSF products. - It makes life easier for packagers because it supports stuff like make install DESTDIR=/foo YOu should READ documentation! It is even simpler with my build system. Your problem is that you once heavily struggled to understand how the non-standard GNU build system works and now obviously regret to learn that there are other (better) solution and that you need to read some documentaion the same way as it was needed for the GNU way. - It makes life easier for people trying to compile from source. ./configure --help |less ; ./configure --whatever is much easier than having to read a number of makefiles in different directories and editing them by hand, especially for non-programmers. - It automatically adapts to new OSes and OS versions rather than hardcoding Linux does things that way (assumptions which may not even be true on all Linux systems) the way your build system does in a few places. Now you are catched! In reallity it is exactly the other way round: - Programs that use the GNU build system only compile on platforms the mantainers of autoconf are aware of. - The Schily makefile system compiles even on unknown platforms if they are similar enough to other known systems. Of course, this property is only available if you use my 'smake' instead of the broken GNU make. This does work since January 2001 when I received my MacOS X box with the first official Darwin version which has been significaltly different in ID strings from all betas before. I'm sure you have a couple of good reasons to prefer your system as well. Let's just agree to disagree on this one, it's really another vi vs. emacs, Linux vs. GNU/Linux or Open
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Joerg Schilling wrote: and your only motivation was to have a private copy of cdrecord running for your A03. Wrong. If that had been my motivation, I would have built a copy for myself without putting it on the net. Yes, I wanted to have my A03 running without using proprietary software. Then I put it on the net to help people in similar situations, and to encourage people with different hardware to extend it so it works with that. ??? Why then didn't you contribute to improve the code? So if people submit patches to add dvd writing support to cdrecord, you will accept them (even if it means opensource cdrecord will compete with closed source cdrecord-prodvd)? -Dan -- [-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cdrecord-ProDVD (fwd)
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jun 13 01:24:15 2002 ??? Why then didn't you contribute to improve the code? So if people submit patches to add dvd writing support to cdrecord, you will accept them (even if it means opensource cdrecord will compete with closed source cdrecord-prodvd)? Why do you try to reverse the meaning of my statements? Is this the way discussions usually are held in the english language? This was obviously related to the fact that until now not a single line of code has been added to improve dvdrtools by Mr. Rosenkraenzer. Jörg EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) chars I am Jorg Schilling URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mkisofs and RSCSI
Hi, I'm using RSCSI since about a year now, because the CD burner is built in a central file server and the desktop computers do not have CDROM drives. Now I'd like to start burning multisession CDs, but mkisofs does NOT support RSCSI. Is there any way to tell mkisofs to use a remote CD drive? Any chance to see remote device support in mkisofs at any time? It's currently not on Joerg's todo list. -- Dipl.-Ing. Erik Kunze Phone: +49 - 89 - 32 14 07 41 PHILOSYS Software GmbH Fax: +49 - 89 - 32 14 07 12 Edisonstr. 6Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] D-85716 Unterschleissheim WWW: www.philosys.de/~kunze PGP-Key: http://blackhole.pca.dfn.de:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xD5759581 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
