Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Joerg Schilling wrote: Thomas Schmittscdbac...@gmx.net wrote: As we are at it, mkisofs can produce HFS images and simple UDF, which xorriso cannot. I am planning to remove HFS support in the future as it seems to be unlikely tha there is a noticable number of Mac OS 9 users left over today. As noted below others are using it. I assume that the effort of maintaining the capability is low (zero?) and making an effort to remove a feature which is being used takes your time and gives one more thing for someone to complain about. Note that mkisofs of cource supports much more than simple UDF. While genisoimage is dead since it has been begun and stays as the feature set from September 2004, mkisofs has seen many enhancements - in special for UDF. There are e.g. Apple specific UDF enhancements. HFS is needed for production of bootable Debian images for PowerPC. (They still have to use genisoimage for that.) Here i lack entirely of specs and would have to explore open source code. If they use this, they are doing it wrong. That is possible, but it's being usefully employed, and it's their distribution. -- E. Robert Bogusta It seemed like a good idea at the time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4de3dc42.50...@tmr.com
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Hi, Joerg Schilling: Except for implementing support for DVD media, cdrecord did never really use any information that could not be retrieved from the specs. For me it is the other way. DVD and BD are clearly explained in MMC-5, whereas raw CD writing stays quite vague. It seems to put emphasis on SAO, instead. me: xorriso does only sessions with a single data track. cdrskin is able to record pure audio CDs, but not the CD-XA format that is prescribed for CD which contain audio and data tracks. Then it is unable to support multi session - something that cdrecord does since 1996. Do you read the demand to burn CD-XA from ECMA-168 ? It does not override ECMA-119 (aka ISO 9660) but seems rather to be a sibling of UDF. (A dead one.) I do multi-session within the constraints of ECMA-119. It works fine. Even Solaris has meanwhile learned to mount the last session. (If it only would learn to allow the user to mount older sessions.) HFS is needed for production of bootable Debian images for PowerPC. If they use this, they are doing it wrong. At least that is what i learned about the powerpc images. The smallest one is ~ 50 MB: http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/6.0.1a/powerpc/iso-cd/debian-6.0.1a-powerpc-businesscard.iso Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/96408426323445@192.168.2.69
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, If you imagine the difference between xorriso and older utilities, what do you think is the main difference that can be reflected on the user experience? That is, what difference does it make if a desktop DVD burning application make use of xorriso that it can offer a unique feature or competition advantage over others? The combination of mkisofs, cdrecord and growisofs still covers most needs of the users. One needs to know the particular properties of the various media types, though. I consider xorriso to be more consistent in its unified view on all kinds of storage media: CD, DVD, BD, block devices, disk files, character devices, pipes. This advantage is best visible if one uses its own commands rather than the emulations of mkisofs and cdrecord. Nevertheless, the cdrecord emulation extends the CD multi-session model for ISO 9660 images to nearly all DVD types and to both BD types. (Use option --grow_overwriteable_iso) xorriso covers the whole life cycle of an ISO image: Creation, expansion, manipulation, extraction of files. It lists the existing sessions and helps with mounting any of them on Linux and FreeBSD. (Solaris is incapable in some cases.) It has strong extra features for data backup. - MD5 checksums of each data file and of the whole session. It has commands for verifying the checksums and for printing them. - Incremental backups may be based either on inode+time, MD5, or plain comparison of file contents. - Transparent zisofs compression (readable on Linux only). - Visible gzip compression. - External filter programs for other compression or encryption. (Quite slow due to forking the filter processes twice per filtered data file.) - Recording and restoring of Linux ACLs and Linux xattr. - Fast mass extraction of files without rattling the DVD drive. xorriso is prepared to serve as slave process under a frontend program. Its options -dialog, -mark and -pkt_output allow the master to send commands into xorriso's stdin and to receive their results and messages from xorriso's stdout. Last but not least, i try to offer user-friendly support. :)) That you do. The one feature of cdrecord which seems to be unique is burning VCD and SVCD images. Since the price of DVD media has dropped and more people have hardware support, use of CD for video is a very special case. I confess I have not used anything other than cdrecord to burn audio CD, so I can't speak for how well that works in other tools. And I still use command line tools directly, based on decades of experience with tools which sit between the user and the command line tool, they have a tendency to make the the process easier to use, and and to make work. -- E. Robert Bogusta It seemed like a good idea at the time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dd2c39a.6070...@tmr.com
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Hi, Rob Bogus ro...@tmr.com wrote: The one feature of cdrecord which seems to be unique is burning VCD and SVCD images. Since the price of DVD media has dropped and more people have hardware support, use of CD for video is a very special case. cdrecord and its clones implement knowledge about CD recording which i cannot read completely from the MMC specs. I guess i could implement most of the exotic stuff in SAO mode but raw CD recording is still quite a riddle to me. The main reason why i never made experiments in that direction is that i simply have no use case and no users for this. I confess I have not used anything other than cdrecord to burn audio CD, so I can't speak for how well that works in other tools. CD TEXT is another point where i lack of technical details. I could probably learn from libcdio if an interested user would show up. xorriso does only sessions with a single data track. cdrskin is able to record pure audio CDs, but not the CD-XA format that is prescribed for CD which contain audio and data tracks. As we are at it, mkisofs can produce HFS images and simple UDF, which xorriso cannot. HFS is needed for production of bootable Debian images for PowerPC. (They still have to use genisoimage for that.) Here i lack entirely of specs and would have to explore open source code. UDF would allow to record video DVDs which comply to the specs for livingroom DVD players. UDF is openly specified as ECMA-167 plus UDF-2.60. Mind twisting. I happily find excuses to do other things first. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/9641576685189@192.168.2.69
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Thomas Schmitt wrote: Hi, Rob Bogusro...@tmr.com wrote: The one feature of cdrecord which seems to be unique is burning VCD and SVCD images. Since the price of DVD media has dropped and more people have hardware support, use of CD for video is a very special case. cdrecord and its clones implement knowledge about CD recording which i cannot read completely from the MMC specs. I guess i could implement most of the exotic stuff in SAO mode but raw CD recording is still quite a riddle to me. The main reason why i never made experiments in that direction is that i simply have no use case and no users for this. We have stacks of CD media and a few people who actually like VCD format, so short stuff does get put in the way. It is a skill which must be refreshed or you wind up working from notes without understanding. Besides, if the tool chain breaks, who would know if we didn't do this? I confess I have not used anything other than cdrecord to burn audio CD, so I can't speak for how well that works in other tools. CD TEXT is another point where i lack of technical details. I could probably learn from libcdio if an interested user would show up. xorriso does only sessions with a single data track. cdrskin is able to record pure audio CDs, but not the CD-XA format that is prescribed for CD which contain audio and data tracks. As we are at it, mkisofs can produce HFS images and simple UDF, which xorriso cannot. HFS is needed for production of bootable Debian images for PowerPC. (They still have to use genisoimage for that.) Here i lack entirely of specs and would have to explore open source code. UDF would allow to record video DVDs which comply to the specs for livingroom DVD players. UDF is openly specified as ECMA-167 plus UDF-2.60. Mind twisting. I happily find excuses to do other things first. But you can generate an image to a disk file and burn it as just data for many of these (which don't need arcane write formats). I confess that we burn ext2 filesystems to DVD, since they are for use with Linux systems and ISO9660 is not needed. We just write them to a file loop mounted and formatted, then burn the image. -- E. Robert Bogusta It seemed like a good idea at the time -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dd2dd33.2070...@tmr.com
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Hi, We have stacks of CD media and a few people who actually like VCD format, so short stuff does get put in the way. It is a skill which must be refreshed or you wind up working from notes without understanding. Besides, if the tool chain breaks, who would know if we didn't do this? There are few complaints about cdrecord and wodim with CD media. A while ago i had a conversation with an interested person where we sketched CD burning from a user supplied cue sheet, i.e. user controlled SAO. It seemed mostly about translating the terminology of e.g. cdrdao back to the MMC specs. Well, as so often, the interested person had other things to do. HFS is needed for production of bootable Debian images for PowerPC. UDF would allow to record video DVDs which comply to the specs for livingroom DVD players. But you can generate an image to a disk file and burn it as just data for many of these (which don't need arcane write formats). I confess that we burn ext2 filesystems to DVD, since they are for use with Linux systems and ISO9660 is not needed. We just write them to a file loop mounted and formatted, then burn the image. In the past i did this with afio and star archives. Meanwhile my backups are entirely based on xorriso. But the HFS needed for Debian GNU/Linux powerpc has to co-exist with an ISO 9660 image that points to the same files. (Aka hybrid image.) The boot facility of the IBM needs HFS and hands over to Debian which then expects ISO 9660 ... if i understood it right. The DVD video UDF is an extra primitive one with certain predefined directory and file names. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-Video I doubt you can get this from the read-write UDF driver of a Linux kernel. Luckily there are no different sector formats like with CD. On DVD and BD we only have data sectors of 2048 bytes each. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/96415364411538@192.168.2.69
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Hi, If you imagine the difference between xorriso and older utilities, what do you think is the main difference that can be reflected on the user experience? That is, what difference does it make if a desktop DVD burning application make use of xorriso that it can offer a unique feature or competition advantage over others? The combination of mkisofs, cdrecord and growisofs still covers most needs of the users. One needs to know the particular properties of the various media types, though. I consider xorriso to be more consistent in its unified view on all kinds of storage media: CD, DVD, BD, block devices, disk files, character devices, pipes. This advantage is best visible if one uses its own commands rather than the emulations of mkisofs and cdrecord. Nevertheless, the cdrecord emulation extends the CD multi-session model for ISO 9660 images to nearly all DVD types and to both BD types. (Use option --grow_overwriteable_iso) xorriso covers the whole life cycle of an ISO image: Creation, expansion, manipulation, extraction of files. It lists the existing sessions and helps with mounting any of them on Linux and FreeBSD. (Solaris is incapable in some cases.) It has strong extra features for data backup. - MD5 checksums of each data file and of the whole session. It has commands for verifying the checksums and for printing them. - Incremental backups may be based either on inode+time, MD5, or plain comparison of file contents. - Transparent zisofs compression (readable on Linux only). - Visible gzip compression. - External filter programs for other compression or encryption. (Quite slow due to forking the filter processes twice per filtered data file.) - Recording and restoring of Linux ACLs and Linux xattr. - Fast mass extraction of files without rattling the DVD drive. xorriso is prepared to serve as slave process under a frontend program. Its options -dialog, -mark and -pkt_output allow the master to send commands into xorriso's stdin and to receive their results and messages from xorriso's stdout. Last but not least, i try to offer user-friendly support. :)) Can you think of a few example of such use cases? I have two backup scripts. One for safely stored DVDs and BDs, the other for an 8 GB USB stick which i carry with me. The USB stick backup has its files compressed and encrypted, because it might get lost on the street. File names and attributes are not encrypted. This allows to mount the stick and to copy the encrypted files on about any computer. The backup contains an unecnrypted copy of the Linux decryption binary and also an unencrypted source tarball of that program. So i'd need only a Unix system and the pass phrase to recover my backup. On the other hand, a cleartext directory tree might reveil information that should better stay private. One has to weigh, whether this is a problem or not. These backups cover about 2 GB of data. A DVD+RW can take about 25 incremental update sessions. A BD is good for about 300 sessions. The USB stick can take about 200 ones with compressed files. The Volume Id of each session gives the backup timestamp: TOC layout : Idx , sbsector , Size , Volume Id ISO session : 1 ,32 , 1107596s , HOME_2011_04_02_230358 ISO session : 2 , 1107648 , 93579s , HOME_2011_04_09_230608 ISO session : 3 , 1201248 , 81831s , HOME_2011_04_16_215808 ISO session : 4 , 1283104 , 73907s , HOME_2011_04_23_225250 ISO session : 5 , 1357024 , 63624s , HOME_2011_04_30_224618 ISO session : 6 , 1420672 , 64155s , HOME_2011_05_07_080810 Media summary: 6 sessions, 1484692 data blocks, 2900m data, 1583m free Although the add-on sessions are small, they show complete snapshots of the 2 GB backup area. For details see man xorriso, section EXAMPLES, Incremental backup of a few directory trees. For large backups i use my frontend tool scdbackup http://scdbackup.sourceforge.net/main_eng.html which composes one or more volumes and prompts the user for media. It is capable of incremental backups too, but other than xorriso it maintains a separate model of the backup on hard disk. scdbackup may use xorriso as ISO 9660 formatter and burn program. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/96260220125929@192.168.2.69
what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
Hello. Having heard a new release of xorriso I am thinking of moving my project (cdrbq.sf.net) to base on xorriso. If you imagine the difference between xorriso and older utilities, what do you think is the main difference that can be reflected on the user experience? That is, what difference does it make if a desktop DVD burning application make use of xorriso that it can offer a unique feature or competition advantage over others? I can think of one answer, but there are probably much more. One answer would be xorriso offers much better control on multi-session manipulation. There may be use-cases where users want to have removable storage that stores like layers, that you can always recover an older version of something, or portable version management and backup system in one. Can you think of a few example of such use cases? I can imagine one but there are probably much more. One might be the contracted photographer shoots a lot of photos and burn them on DVD, and do a second round of processing to delete unwanted ones before delivering to customer. Had the customer wanted a deleted photo because she changed her mind, with manual-instruction they can recover from previous sessions. Photographers don't keep the deleted photos, customer do, thus rule out copyright and privacy concern. Do this scenario happen in your country? Best regards Zhang Weiwu -- CDRBQ - desktop application for optical disc authoring / recording / burning Written in TCL/TK, usable for Windows, Linux and similar systems. http://cdrbq.sourceforge.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dc4be24.6080...@realss.com
Re: what difference xorriso is it going to make on the user interface?
I guess since this is a technical list I may be behave too weird, thus I need to explain why I ask such questions. Marketing is to match products with needs. I wish to have a marketing strategy before working heavily on design a software interface. The needs are the use cases. So basically these question deserved to be answered by any desktop application: 1. Who uses your software and for what purpose (description of use cases, like that one with photographer delivering photo to customer). Usually there are many, many use cases. 2. Does the application design match that use case? E.g. an application offer audio track together with file system information on the same interface is a bad idea because there is no use case involving manipulating audio track and file system at the same time, even if software can do it. 3. Do the software offer unique advantage on these particular use cases? 4. How to message this advantage. I am in the process of thinking these 4 points. I think, Thomas Schmitt for example, added many of his ideas into his software projects and became features. He doesn't invent these ideas just for fun, it is probably because he needed these features for his use cases, and his use cases might be common for a segment of users. If these use cases are studied, the advantage of using his tool is then getting obvious so is the guide to make user interface for them. In fact I am interested in how /any one/ uses the tools offered by all these genisoimage, cdrecord and xorriso stuff. They are best told by stories. I can start contributing one of my own story and hope to get some others from you. Read on: On 05/07/2011 11:36 AM, Zhang Weiwu maintains CDRBQ wrote: I can think of one answer, but there are probably much more. One answer would be xorriso offers much better control on multi-session manipulation. I think I need to offer more detail of this feature. 10 years ago I fell in love with Nero with their unique feature that I can rename, delete a file on CD-R almost the same operation as I do on MS Explorer except doing it in Nero, and burn it by adding an additional session. xorriso allows doing this too. I used to have several dozens of sessions on CD-R. By that time USB flash memory is not common and often is of very low capacity, thus Nero offered a huge advantage. However this advantage is not significant today as USB memory have the same amount of capacity as optical discs. -- CDRBQ - desktop application for optical disc authoring / recording / burning Written in TCL/TK, usable for Windows, Linux and similar systems. http://cdrbq.sourceforge.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to cdwrite-requ...@other.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@other.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4dc4c09d.5070...@realss.com
