[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "marcel" == Marcel Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi marcel> While reading slashdot, I found this comment interesting (yes, that does marcel> happen on slashdot :-) ) marcel> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=83579&cid=7310813 marcel> "Why is Linux trying to send a flush cache command to a CD-ROM drive in the marcel> first place? That's a stupid thing to do. The ATAPI FLUSH CACHE command tells marcel> the device to flush its write cache to the media. A CD-ROM has no write cache, marcel> and can't write to any media. Of course, it's even more stupid for a drive to marcel> self-destruct when it gets a flush cache command..." marcel> Is this maybe 2 bugs "working together"? Using FLUSH_CACHE where it shouldn't, marcel> and have the cdrom reading that as UPLOAD_FIRMWARE Yes. there are two bugs here: - One, sending FLUSH_CACHE to a CD-ROM drive. CD-ROM drive decides: * do nothing (i.e. it don't have a cache, nothing to do). * return an error (Are you stupid, I don't have write capability). * return an "unimplemented/unknown command" Any of the three returns is ok. The reason of sending a FLUSH_CACHE for a CDROM is that way, we can share the CD-ROM and CD-RW code for packet writing. - Now the big problem: * ATAPI spec states that one CDROM not implementing FLUSH_CACHE command is ok, but using that command to do anything else is not allowed. - Problem 2: Having any kind of modify firmware command that don't test that the payload of the command is a firmware by checksum/signature/etc is just the more stupid thing that you can do in hardware world. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "jos" == Jos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hi jos> Yes, it is a firmware bug, and yes, the LG drives are responsible for this. jos> But, it is Mandrakes own fault that this happens. Yes. And we are also the cause of all the evil things in the world. jos> If you take beta / heavy modified kernels instead of kernels that jos> have been tested by the entire linux community, you can expect jos> things like these to happen. yes? And guess what. When one new feature is talked about being integrated into upstream kernel, one of the best ways of backing it is that it has been included during quite time in distributions, and that it don't show problems there. jos> True, strange that this bug was able to tunnel trough all RCs, jos> but this once again proves that it's better to use the entire jos> linux community as testers instead of a few beta testers, jos> i.e. use only stock kernels. That is good if the functionality of stock kernel is ok for you. Examples: - you only use sound for playing some MP3 OSS is ok for you. If you want to do anything interesting with sound, you need ALSA. - you have a server that is 100km away, you want lm_sensors to read the temperatures remotely and detect when fans die. - you are a company, and you need IPSEC, information as clear text is not good enough for you. - You uses a firewall and thinks that being able to handle IRC protocols is a need (until not so far away iptables on kernel upstream was not able to tunnel IRC). - You have new hardware that without ACPI don't works correctly (there are hardware like that, specially laptops, and each time more). Real ACPI has only been integrated in kernel in 2.4.22. - You have a nice broadcom network card. bcm5700 and bcm4400 are a lot of times the only drivers supporting your card. - You think that waiting a lot each time that you start high-IO operations is not an option (Andrea VM patches & low latency ones). - You think that having a CD-RW being able to do more things that only copy CD's is a good idea (packet writing). - and so on, and so on, ... Notice that mayority of the people don't need all the patches in Mandrake, they only need 2-3 or 4. The problem is to have a kernel that fits lots of people. jos> Mandrake is not a linux distribution known for stability. This is a bad statement. If you explain me _why_ you told that, I can try to fix it. but with only that sentence, I can't, sorry :( jos> let's please take jos> stability as top priority for Mandrake 10.0. This way Mandrake will get the jos> good name that belongs to such a cool distribution. Godd goal, I agree with it. And I do my best to do it. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "david" == David Walser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: david> Juan Quintela wrote: >>> "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive >> >> 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes >> that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. >> >> Later, Juan. david> A friend of mine asked to ask if the 2.6 kernel is affected by this. not affected at all. Only if it uses some port of packet writing patches. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "juan" == Juan Quintela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: juan> Ok, official stance (will sent to slashdot): arghh, official as about who it is stated in the ATAPI specifications as read from the kernel hackers. Mandrake official stance will be issued later. Sorry for the confusion. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "bg" == <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: >>> > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I >>> have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 >>> running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive >>> >>> 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes >>> that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. >>> >>> Later, Juan. >>> >>> PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE >>> command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. >> >> SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you >> guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. bg> /. posted a really badly researched post on this (with a bad title too), bg> but it seems public opinion is that hardware shouldn't be vulnerable. bg> It wouldn't hurt though to have an official position sent to /., I think bg> they should reasonably update the summary to indicate that this is a bg> hardware issue that would also affect other users, and hopefully push the bg> availability of updates and how to use them. Ok, official stance (will sent to slashdot): It is not related with linux specially, it can happens in Windows also. It is more, you can search and find that people are also having problems in windows. Problem: sending a FLUSH_COMMAND to an LG drive kills it. Expected output: Ignore the command/return one error. FLUSH_COMMAND support is not required. Real Problem: not having implemented this command is ok, but reusing it for anything else is against the specs. It appears that LG decided to reuse this command for modifying the firmware. Hope this helps, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Saturday 25 October 2003 04:44 pm, Tim Sawchuck wrote: > On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:23:23 -0700 > > Brook Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribed on electronic parchment: > > On Saturday 25 October 2003 05:03 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > > > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you > > > guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. > > > > I think i posted a few days back this was most likely the case. lg drives > > are garbage. They are maybe good for target practice but that is about > > all. > > Well, Mdk 9.2 hit the bullseye! (uh-oh, ducking and run like hell. ) > > Tim well good ridance. Hopefully people will quit buying garbage dells also since dell uses so many other garbage parts besides the lgs. -- -~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~- Brook Humphrey Mobile PC Medic, 420 1st, Cheney, WA 99004, 509-235-9107 http://www.webmedic.net, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Holiness unto the Lord -~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Sunday 26 October 2003 11:55 am, Luca Olivetti wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: > >>>PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE [snipped] > Yes, the comments with enough points to be visible by default are > positive wrt mandrake and negative wrt lg hardware problem. > Now, one thing I read in one of those comments is that the fix was to > simply remove packet writing capabilities. Is that true? If so I don't > think is a good idea do disable a useful functionality for all users due > to some defective drives. LG should fix it, not all user be penalized > with reduced functionality (those not using an lg drive) or a broken drive. > I think the real fix is to not FLUSH_CACHE drives that cannot write. > Bye -- John Allen, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] MandrakeClub Silver Member. http://allentech.homelinux.org/
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ha scritto: PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. /. posted a really badly researched post on this (with a bad title too), but it seems public opinion is that hardware shouldn't be vulnerable. Yes, the comments with enough points to be visible by default are positive wrt mandrake and negative wrt lg hardware problem. Now, one thing I read in one of those comments is that the fix was to simply remove packet writing capabilities. Is that true? If so I don't think is a good idea do disable a useful functionality for all users due to some defective drives. LG should fix it, not all user be penalized with reduced functionality (those not using an lg drive) or a broken drive. Bye -- - Yo también quiero una Europa libre de Patentes de Software - - I want a Software Patents Free Europe too! And you? - --- EuropeSwPatentFree - http://EuropeSwPatentFree.hispalinux.es pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 01:20:35 +0200 Juan Quintela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have > cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 running. > There are no problems marc> with my LG drive > > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes > that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. > > Later, Juan. > > PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE > command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. While reading slashdot, I found this comment interesting (yes, that does happen on slashdot :-) ) http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=83579&cid=7310813 "Why is Linux trying to send a flush cache command to a CD-ROM drive in the first place? That's a stupid thing to do. The ATAPI FLUSH CACHE command tells the device to flush its write cache to the media. A CD-ROM has no write cache, and can't write to any media. Of course, it's even more stupid for a drive to self-destruct when it gets a flush cache command..." Is this maybe 2 bugs "working together"? Using FLUSH_CACHE where it shouldn't, and have the cdrom reading that as UPLOAD_FIRMWARE -- Marcel Pol
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
Am Sonntag, 26. Oktober 2003 11:11 schrieb Michael Scherer: > I do not know if the error is recoverable ( ie reflashing the > firmware ), Nope, reflashing the firmware does not help. flashing before frying the drive does help. My drive is fried (returned it for money allready) The same drive with newer firmware on other machines did not get killed. I have tried to flash it afterwards and it didn'tr help, it was the same as before. So no need to try it . Hope that helps other people. Steffen
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> On Sunday 26 Oct 2003 01:03, Greg Meyer wrote: >> On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: >> > > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > >> > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I >> have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk >> 9.2rc2 running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive >> > >> > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) >> fixes that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. >> > >> > Later, Juan. >> > >> > PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE >> command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. >> >> SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope >> you guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. > > Yes, it is a firmware bug, and yes, the LG drives are responsible for > this. But, it is Mandrakes own fault that this happens. I don't agree. > If you take > beta / heavy modified kernels instead of kernels that have been tested > by the entire linux community, you can expect things like these to > happen. AFAIK (I may be wrong), SuSE has been shipping with this patch for quite a while (AFAIK it is their patch), and there have been some reports of SuSE doing the same thing to LG drives ... And, if no-one found this problem before, in a well-known patch which is supposed to be merged into 2.6.x, how was it going to be found? > True, strange that this bug was able to tunnel trough all RCs, > but this once again proves that it's better to use the entire linux > community as testers instead of a few beta testers, i.e. use only stock > kernels. OK, so you want us to ship with a totally vanilla kernel? No XFS? OSS only (no ALSA)? No software suspend? No ACLs? No cloop? No CIFS? BTW, there is a vanilla kernel in contrib. How many people actually run it? > Mandrake is not a linux distribution known for stability, let's please > take stability as top priority for Mandrake 10.0. My servers tell me otherwise (some machines with clients I haven't seen in over a year because they haven't ever had problems with them). They wouldn't be running Mandrake without ACLs/XFS (which is one reason they don't run Redhat BTW, it's too much work to get a real samba server running on Redhat and a few other distros which have kernels without the features I need). > This way Mandrake > will get the good name that belongs to such a cool distribution. A distro with no features, that's cool. Not! Regards, Buchan
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Sunday 26 October 2003 09:51, Jos wrote: > On Sunday 26 Oct 2003 01:03, Greg Meyer wrote: > > On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: > > > > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. > > > I have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk > > > 9.2rc2 running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive > > > > > > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) > > > fixes that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. > > > > > > Later, Juan. > > > > > > PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE > > > command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. > > > > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope > > you guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public > > opinion. > > Yes, it is a firmware bug, and yes, the LG drives are responsible for > this. But, it is Mandrakes own fault that this happens. If you take > beta / heavy modified kernels instead of kernels that have been > tested by the entire linux community, you can expect things like > these to happen. True, strange that this bug was able to tunnel > trough all RCs, but this once again proves that it's better to use > the entire linux community as testers instead of a few beta testers, > i.e. use only stock kernels. We should drop support for all hardware not in the kernel ? To give a example, my usb modem, and so we should let the newbies patch their own kernel. Yes why not. After all, they will not know how to do this, but, if they want something that simply works, they should take windows instead. This is simply not the way mandrake works. If you want a default kernel, you can take the kernel-marcelo package. If you want something with 6 month of test on a 3 years old kernel, take debian. And now imagine this : we use stock kernel as all distibution in the world, and this bug now remains undiscovered. It will be here for 3 years, fry some cd readers, but, since they do not have anything in common, all people just say that lg drive are crap. and the bug continue to fry cdrom drive for years. In fact, since nobody would expect a kernel to fry a cdrom drive, i think that no one would have fill a bug report. It may even remain undiscovered until kernel 4.2, when ide will maybe no longer supported. I have 3 dead drives, and one of them simply stop working one day ( creative dvd ). Maybe it was something like this. Maybe not. What if the patch goes in the main stream kernel, and the bug still remains undiscovered, for the same reason ? It will do more harm. But since no newbie will ever post on lkml to say 'kernel fried my cdrom drive', it will not be discovered. Or not in 1 week. Maybe one year, until one distro ship a kernel and people start complaining. So, using stock kernel wouldn't have change anything. I do not know if the error is recoverable ( ie reflashing the firmware ), but, this is clearly not a problem on mandrake side. They have done more than one month testing, and the bug passed all RC and betas. In fact, maybe someone fried his drive and think it burned because it worked too long. All i hope is that LG give updated firmware, and instruction on how to recover the disk. > Mandrake is not a linux distribution known for stability, let's > please take stability as top priority for Mandrake 10.0. This way > Mandrake will get the good name that belongs to such a cool > distribution. And so, what do you propose ? To have a 3 month freeze period ? To use one year old software ? We do as much as we can for stability, but, as you have seen, some bugs remains undiscovered even with 4 or 5 beta releases. And i do not think that adding 10 releases would really help. -- Michaël Scherer
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Sunday 26 Oct 2003 01:03, Greg Meyer wrote: > On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: > > > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have > > cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 > > running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive > > > > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes > > that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. > > > > Later, Juan. > > > > PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE > > command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. > > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you > guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. Yes, it is a firmware bug, and yes, the LG drives are responsible for this. But, it is Mandrakes own fault that this happens. If you take beta / heavy modified kernels instead of kernels that have been tested by the entire linux community, you can expect things like these to happen. True, strange that this bug was able to tunnel trough all RCs, but this once again proves that it's better to use the entire linux community as testers instead of a few beta testers, i.e. use only stock kernels. Mandrake is not a linux distribution known for stability, let's please take stability as top priority for Mandrake 10.0. This way Mandrake will get the good name that belongs to such a cool distribution. Jos
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 23:23:23 -0700 Brook Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribed on electronic parchment: > On Saturday 25 October 2003 05:03 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you > > guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. > I think i posted a few days back this was most likely the case. lg drives > are garbage. They are maybe good for target practice but that is about > all. Well, Mdk 9.2 hit the bullseye! (uh-oh, ducking and run like hell. ) Tim -- I often read this forum on my PDA, please use plain text! _ ( ) ASCII ribbon campaign against HTML e-mail x registered Linux user # 329428 / \ GnuPG KeyID 6B5A70DF www.keyserver.net
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Saturday 25 October 2003 05:03 pm, Greg Meyer wrote: > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you > guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. I think i posted a few days back this was most likely the case. lg drives are garbage. They are maybe good for target practice but that is about all. -- -~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~- Brook Humphrey Mobile PC Medic, 420 1st, Cheney, WA 99004, 509-235-9107 http://www.webmedic.net, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Holiness unto the Lord -~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-~`'~-
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
Juan Quintela wrote: >> "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have cd-rw drive, > marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 running. There are no problems > marc> with my LG drive > > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes > that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. > > Later, Juan. A friend of mine asked to ask if the 2.6 kernel is affected by this.
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives - please send official statements
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 08:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: >>> Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE >>> command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. >> SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope >> you guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public >> opinion. > /. posted a really badly researched post on this (with a bad title > too), but it seems public opinion is that hardware shouldn't be > vulnerable. > It wouldn't hurt though to have an official position sent to /., I > think they should reasonably update the summary to indicate that this > is a hardware issue that would also affect other users, and hopefully > push the availability of updates and how to use them. I'd say send a release to all of the usual suspects (starting with /. LinuxToday LWN and working outwards). Might want to see if LG have anything they want to add. Like "Oops, sorry!" Cheers; Leon
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: >> > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I >> have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 >> running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive >> >> 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes >> that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. >> >> Later, Juan. >> >> PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE >> command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. > > SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you > guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. /. posted a really badly researched post on this (with a bad title too), but it seems public opinion is that hardware shouldn't be vulnerable. It wouldn't hurt though to have an official position sent to /., I think they should reasonably update the summary to indicate that this is a hardware issue that would also affect other users, and hopefully push the availability of updates and how to use them. Regards, Buchan
Re: [Cooker] Re: LG Drives
On Saturday 25 October 2003 07:20 pm, Juan Quintela wrote: > > "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have > cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 running. > There are no problems marc> with my LG drive > > 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes > that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. > > Later, Juan. > > PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE > command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. SO it turns out to be a firmware bug after all that. I really hope you guys don't take the heat for this in the court of public opinion. -- /g "Outside of a dog, a man's best friend is a book, inside a dog it's too dark to read" -Groucho Marx
[Cooker] Re: LG Drives
> "marc" == Marc Guise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: marc> I read the post about Mdk 9.2 and LG on mandrakeusers.org. I have cd-rw drive, marc> model HL-DT-ST GCE 8400b and I have Mdk 9.2rc2 running. There are no problems marc> with my LG drive 21mdk just updated (vdanen should be doing the official update) fixes that problem. Only LG plain CD-ROMS are affected. Later, Juan. PD. Yep, whoeved decided at LG that reusing for UPLOAD_FIRMAWARE command FLUSH_CACHE comand should be shoot. Twice. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
