Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Let me take the occasion to show to you the due politeness and
respect by informing you in advance about my upcoming cdrecord
compatibility wrapper around libburn: cdrskin .
What kind of advantage should this have?
Cdrecord is openso
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And in case you also missunderstood forks: A fork is a _working_ and
_maintained_ modified version of a program. What you see with the bastardized
cdrtools versions on Linux is neither working nor maintained, it is just
a res
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Be careful: Debian publishes a bastardized version of cdrtools.
Most problems go away once you convert to the official programs.
There seems to be no open source "official program."
Looks like you missunderstood
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was thinking that a simple wrapper to open() which adds
O_DIRECT might be sufficient, but it turned out that this
alone is not sufficient: the buffers used by the programs
must have a certain alignment. This is not guaranteed
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 01:38:19AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >Please tell me why an unmodified cdrecord runs best on Linux and
>> >why > 90% of all bugs on the Debian bug tracking system for cdrtools
>> >are caused by the modifications done by De
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Let me take the occasion to show to you the due politeness and
> respect by informing you in advance about my upcoming cdrecord
> compatibility wrapper around libburn: cdrskin .
What kind of advantage should this have?
Cdrecord is opensource and portable to 30 differ
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Oh, FFS. Give it a rest, Joerg. Most of the work that the various
> >> Linux distro people have done on cdrtools is to fix real bugs that you
> >> won't acknowledge. Sometimes users simply want things to work on their
> >> systems, rather than random
On Saturday 21 January 2006 19:06, Steve McIntyre wrote:
[...]
>--
>Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Getting a SCSI chain working is perfectly simple if
> you remember that there must be exactly three terminations: one on
> one end of the cable, one
Hi Joerg,
> > Would there be volunteer testers for a united cdrecord
> > compatibility wrapper based on libburn for CD and
> > growisofs for DVD ?
>
> The last time I checked libburn, it was a complete desater.
> The first time where a project turned unmaintainable short
> after it's creation.
On Sun, Jan 22, 2006 at 12:14:55AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >And in case you also missunderstood forks: A fork is a _working_ and
>> >_maintained_ modified version of a program. What you see with the
>> >bastardized
>> >cdrtools versions on Lin
Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >And in case you also missunderstood forks: A fork is a _working_ and
> >_maintained_ modified version of a program. What you see with the
> >bastardized
> >cdrtools versions on Linux is neither working nor maintained, it is just
> >a result of the rel
On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 11:35:25PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> There seems to be no open source "official program."
>
>Looks like you missunderstood OpenSource and forks.
>
>Even for Open Source, there is an Author or a group of authors.
>The vers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > I recently introduced a fifo into my growisofs script.
> > > Now it is already obsolete. What a carreer. :))
> > >
> > For a talk I gave on "introduction to pthreads" I wrote a ring buffer
> > program with most of the options one could want.
>
> Isn't ther
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Would there be volunteer testers for a united cdrecord
> compatibility wrapper based on libburn for CD and
> growisofs for DVD ? (With the funny property to have
> TAO-like behavior for DVD and only SAO for CD. Libburn
> is only available for x86 Linux 2.4 and 2.6 afaik.
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> isn't open source. I find it very nice to have a single tool to burn ISO
> images, because then I can write the media type fitted to the data size
> without needing multiple tools.
This is why I use cdrecord wherever possible.
And just a note: growiso
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I was thinking that a simple wrapper to open() which adds
> >O_DIRECT might be sufficient, but it turned out that this
> >alone is not sufficient: the buffers used by the programs
> >must have a certain alignment. This is not guaranteed
> >without modify
Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Be careful: Debian publishes a bastardized version of cdrtools.
> >Most problems go away once you convert to the official programs.
> >
> There seems to be no open source "official program."
Looks like you missunderstood OpenSource and forks.
Even for
Hi,
> > I recently introduced a fifo into my growisofs script.
> > Now it is already obsolete. What a carreer. :))
> >
> For a talk I gave on "introduction to pthreads" I wrote a ring buffer
> program with most of the options one could want.
Isn't there anybody in the world who did not make his
Hi,
> > Bill Davidsen wrote:
> > Because growisofs doesn't do CD, cdrecord doesn't do DVD, and -ProDVD
> > isn't open source. I find it very nice to have a single tool to burn ISO
> > images, because then I can write the media type fitted to the data size
> > without needing multiple tools.
>
> Because growisofs doesn't do CD, cdrecord doesn't do DVD, and -ProDVD
> isn't open source. I find it very nice to have a single tool to burn ISO
> images, because then I can write the media type fitted to the data size
> without needing multiple tools.
That's why I have used my writecd script
Joerg Schilling wrote:
"Thaddeus H. Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This post regards Debian cdrtools cdrecord/cdrecord.c.
It may be old news to you. If so, ignore it; no reply
is needed. If it does interest you, however, please
copy replies to me.
Be careful: Debian publishes a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
My suspicion is that this can be done by option
-force
It might be worth a try with the unpatched program.
His problems are just caused by broken DVD support in the DVD
patch applied by Debian.
My DVD needs get served well by original growisofs
Patrick Ohly wrote:
On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:09 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as you
still have to pull a lot of data from disk, you still put quite a
pressure on VM subsystem, so direct I/O can still help,
But how to talk afio, star or mkisofs into that ?
I was thinking th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
How come that the time granularity of the backup processing chain
does not get finer as the systems get faster ?
What do you understand by time granularity?
I see a fifo as a method to smoothen out peaks and gaps in a
input function and to bring t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
i nearly gave up the hope to see more growisofs releases.
The release of version 6.0 is good news.
dvd+rw-tools 6.0 are available for download at usual location,
http://fy.chalmers.se/~appro/linux/DVD+RW/. In addition to bug fixes
[most notably for Pioneer un
On Tue, 2006-01-17 at 20:09 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > as you
> > still have to pull a lot of data from disk, you still put quite a
> > pressure on VM subsystem, so direct I/O can still help,
>
> But how to talk afio, star or mkisofs into that ?
I was thinking that a simple wrapper to
Hi,
> > So i have not much reason to try any DVD-patched cdrecords yet.
> > I actually wonder why they live forth.
>
> Some people appear to prefer one tool for one burning needs, without
> locking themselves in to the commercial expiring stuff.
Oh, i do not put in question the convenience to us
Hi,
> > So i have not much reason to try any DVD-patched cdrecords yet.
> > I actually wonder why they live forth.
>
> I wondered too and questioned that, and got my head bitten off on the
> dvdrtools list
Only good we are virtual entities here.
The blood spill would be immense if we met in rea
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> My DVD needs get served well by original growisofs and
> cdrecord-ProDVD.
> So i have not much reason to try any DVD-patched cdrecords yet.
> I actually wonder why they live forth.
Some people appear to prefer one tool for one burning needs, without
locking themselves
29 matches
Mail list logo