Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #3615 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-01-07 20:15 -0800 |
| Last post | 2013-03-21 14:06 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 147 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-07 20:15 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-08 06:03 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-07 23:33 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-07 23:40 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-08 22:10 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-08 22:07 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:07 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-23 10:08 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-24 05:04 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-24 11:04 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Loki Harfagr <l0k1@thedarkdesign.free.fr.INVALID> - 2012-01-25 18:33 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-25 20:17 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-25 21:37 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-25 22:32 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-26 01:33 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-26 07:56 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-26 09:26 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-26 22:43 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2012-01-27 00:43 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-26 20:08 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-26 22:55 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-26 18:15 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-27 07:55 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-27 07:51 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2012-01-27 09:29 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-27 20:35 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-01-27 22:45 +0100
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-26 18:58 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2012-01-27 07:22 -0600
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-27 20:47 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-01-27 22:03 +0100
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-27 21:38 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-27 21:54 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-28 00:00 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-28 01:32 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-28 01:54 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-29 08:01 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-29 19:09 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Darren Salt <news@youmustbejoking.demon.cu.invalid> - 2012-01-31 17:57 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-31 21:12 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2012-01-27 16:44 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-27 16:39 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? lynxuser@mouse-potato.com - 2012-01-27 14:17 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Baho Utot <baho-utot@invlaid.com> - 2012-01-27 09:44 -0500
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Feranija <feranija@mouse-potato.com> - 2012-01-27 07:02 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-27 20:53 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:54 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:43 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-21 18:02 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-21 17:30 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-21 23:01 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-03-22 04:10 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-22 07:19 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-22 17:48 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-22 17:51 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-22 17:46 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-03-23 04:45 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-03-23 04:47 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Balwinder S Dheeman <bsd.SANSPAM@anu.homelinux.net> - 2013-03-23 21:26 +0530
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-22 18:05 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-22 17:57 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-22 07:17 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 01:30 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-03-23 02:40 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 13:33 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 10:41 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 15:29 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 11:57 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-03-23 17:24 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 19:02 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-03-23 20:00 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 23:22 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 19:44 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 23:56 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 20:36 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-24 00:54 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-22 18:02 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-22 14:34 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 11:48 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 13:35 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-23 11:59 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 16:35 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-23 13:09 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-23 17:14 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-23 13:33 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2013-03-23 17:58 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-23 14:19 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 19:18 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2013-03-23 19:18 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-23 17:25 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) - 2013-03-24 00:05 +0200
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-23 23:39 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) - 2013-03-24 09:00 +0200
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-03-24 16:04 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-24 13:46 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> - 2013-03-24 19:07 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-24 17:06 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? "Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" <njsg@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-24 21:20 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Fedora bug tracking Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-03-24 20:08 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Fedora bug tracking Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-25 09:59 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 22:17 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? "Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" <njsg@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-24 23:07 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-25 09:57 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 22:35 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? "Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" <njsg@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-24 23:03 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 21:42 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 21:31 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) - 2013-03-24 09:00 +0200
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 11:29 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-23 23:34 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 19:58 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 11:31 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-24 08:56 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-30 12:06 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-30 13:24 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-24 17:46 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-24 15:53 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 21:45 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-24 21:51 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 20:53 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-03-25 08:32 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2013-03-23 17:22 +0100
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-23 17:13 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 18:44 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-03-24 04:15 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-24 11:34 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-22 17:56 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-03-22 18:39 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2013-03-22 22:14 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 16:25 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 13:03 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-23 18:39 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-23 16:37 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-21 17:23 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-22 17:58 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-03-22 17:53 -0400
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-23 09:20 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:35 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2012-01-25 23:28 +0100
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2012-01-26 07:41 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:31 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:23 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:21 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-26 10:38 -0800
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2012-01-08 15:50 +0000
Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de - 2013-03-21 14:06 +0000
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
| From | Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 13:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20130323093546@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #7571 |
On 2013-03-23, Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote: > This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools > after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software. I don't think my failure rate was 50%, but it was pretty high. After switching to cdrtools 3.0 the failure rate became negligible. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.) "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 11:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <iczjxurttm.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7571 |
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: > In article <icli9fcmgm.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: > >>> If you like people to get > 50% spoiled media, continue to recommend wodim... >> >>50% failure rate? > > This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools > after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software. > > There are of cause other people who do not have problems with wodim because they > don't use it. I'm still not buying it. I don't know who this "typical user" was but I suspect he had a bad drive or bad media. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 16:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kiklkc$vg3$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #7578 |
In article <iczjxurttm.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote:
>Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes:
>>>50% failure rate?
>>
>> This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools
>> after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software.
>>
>> There are of cause other people who do not have problems with wodim because they
>> don't use it.
>
>I'm still not buying it.
>
>I don't know who this "typical user" was but I suspect he had a bad
>drive or bad media.
So you like to tell us that when using the same drive and the same pile of
blank media.... when you just change the program to burn and there is a change,
the cause is still not the program but the driv/media?
--
EMail:joerg@schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 13:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icsj3mrqke.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7583 |
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: > In article <iczjxurttm.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: >>>>50% failure rate? >>> >>> This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools >>> after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software. >>> >>> There are of cause other people who do not have problems with wodim because they >>> don't use it. >> >>I'm still not buying it. >> >>I don't know who this "typical user" was but I suspect he had a bad >>drive or bad media. > > So you like to tell us that when using the same drive and the same pile of > blank media.... when you just change the program to burn and there is a change, > the cause is still not the program but the driv/media? Yes, I'd like to tell us that. As I said, wodim burns DVDs just fine. So, if you know a user with a 50% failure rate, I'm not going to believe Wodim was the cause. Here is you blaming Wodim: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461094 even when the bug report says the user had problems with Wodim and cdrecord. All these years and you are still fighting these pointless battles... -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 17:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nql3t.346462$kp4.131298@newsfe09.iad> |
| In reply to | #7578 |
On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: > >> In article <icli9fcmgm.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: >> >>>> If you like people to get > 50% spoiled media, continue to recommend wodim... >>> >>>50% failure rate? >> >> This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools >> after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software. >> >> There are of cause other people who do not have problems with wodim because they >> don't use it. > > I'm still not buying it. > > I don't know who this "typical user" was but I suspect he had a bad > drive or bad media. > You heard from Blake. His failure rate dropped from high (tens of percent) to almost zero on the switch. That is evidence that your suspected reason is wrong.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 13:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icobearpg9.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7586 |
unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> writes: > On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: >> >>> In article <icli9fcmgm.fsf@home.home>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de writes: >>> >>>>> If you like people to get > 50% spoiled media, continue to recommend wodim... >>>> >>>>50% failure rate? >>> >>> This what typical users report as the reason for switching to cdrtools >>> after discovering that their distributor did not ship the real software. >>> >>> There are of cause other people who do not have problems with wodim because they >>> don't use it. >> >> I'm still not buying it. >> >> I don't know who this "typical user" was but I suspect he had a bad >> drive or bad media. > > You heard from Blake. His failure rate dropped from high (tens of > percent) to almost zero on the switch. That is evidence that your > suspected reason is wrong. Sorry, didn't see that. Maybe you could re-post it so we can see how many variables were controlled for. Is tens of percent close to >50%? I've burned at last 25 DVDs. They all played. I know anecdotes are not data, but 25 good burns in a row just isn't compatible with claims of 50% failure. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 17:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnkkrrdi.hqp.BitTwister@wb.home.test> |
| In reply to | #7589 |
On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:33:26 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > > I've burned at last 25 DVDs. They all played. > I know anecdotes are not data, but 25 good burns in a row > just isn't compatible with claims of 50% failure. I wonder if some of the "variables" are hardware. I had quite a rash of burn failures which seemed to clear up when I switched over to cdrtools. Another variable is, a *-R burn or multiple *-RW burns. Seems like I get about 6 good DVD burns before I start getting failures.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 14:19 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icfvzmrnbc.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7590 |
Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> writes: > On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:33:26 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >> >> I've burned at last 25 DVDs. They all played. >> I know anecdotes are not data, but 25 good burns in a row >> just isn't compatible with claims of 50% failure. > > I wonder if some of the "variables" are hardware. > > I had quite a rash of burn failures which seemed to clear up when I > switched over to cdrtools. > > Another variable is, a *-R burn or multiple *-RW burns. > Seems like I get about 6 good DVD burns before I start getting > failures. Anecdotes are still not data, but I had pretty consistent bad results with RW CDs. That was so long ago, I'm sure I was using cdrtools. They just wouldn't read on other systems. Haven't used RW media since. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 19:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kikv67$lko$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #7590 |
In article <slrnkkrrdi.hqp.BitTwister@wb.home.test>,
Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 13:33:26 -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>> I've burned at last 25 DVDs. They all played.
>> I know anecdotes are not data, but 25 good burns in a row
>> just isn't compatible with claims of 50% failure.
>
>I wonder if some of the "variables" are hardware.
Wodim does not implement the basic code that is needed to write DVDs correctly.
This is e.g. retreiving the media size....
>I had quite a rash of burn failures which seemed to clear up when I
>switched over to cdrtools.
>
>Another variable is, a *-R burn or multiple *-RW burns.
>Seems like I get about 6 good DVD burns before I start getting
>failures.
This is a bit strange, but I did never check and write down a complete list of
what mandatory SCSI commands wodim does not send to the drive.
Every positive result with wodim is a miracle, so anything may happen.
My impression is that people who rarely write media and who use wodim are
frequently a victim of the FUD from Debian and are not willing to believe
what's the reason when they have a failure.
The people who frequently write media all use cdrecord because they are not
willing to pay for the bad software from Debian.
--
EMail:joerg@schily.net (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 19:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20130323150605@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #7589 |
On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > Sorry, didn't see that. Maybe you could re-post it so we can > see how many variables were controlled for. After installing Ubuntu Linux a few years ago (I don't recall the version) I wound up burning a lot of coasters. Poking around the system I discovered there was some thing called "wodim" installed instead of the "cdrecord" that I had come to expect. So I downloaded and installed cdrtools and the problem went away. (Same burner, same package of discs, same source material.) This is obviously anecdotal and not a statistically valid sample, but as the saying goes "it works for me." Since having that experience, with each subsequent update to a new version of Linux (currently Xubuntu 12.04), I download and install cdrtools as a matter of course. As I've said, I really don't know or care about the politics and personalities involved in the dispute between Debian and Mr. Schilling. I just prefer to use what I have found to work best. (Of course your mileage may vary.) -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.) "Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 17:25 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ictxo1repe.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7596 |
Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> writes: > On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> Sorry, didn't see that. Maybe you could re-post it so we can >> see how many variables were controlled for. > > After installing Ubuntu Linux a few years ago (I don't recall the > version) I wound up burning a lot of coasters. Poking around the system I > discovered there was some thing called "wodim" installed instead of the > "cdrecord" that I had come to expect. So I downloaded and installed > cdrtools and the problem went away. (Same burner, same package of discs, > same source material.) > > This is obviously anecdotal and not a statistically valid sample, but > as the saying goes "it works for me." Since having that experience, > with each subsequent update to a new version of Linux (currently Xubuntu > 12.04), I download and install cdrtools as a matter of course. > > As I've said, I really don't know or care about the politics and > personalities involved in the dispute between Debian and Mr. Schilling. > I just prefer to use what I have found to work best. (Of course your mileage > may vary.) Thanks. So I see neither the 10 percent nor the ridiculous claim of >50%. I don't care about the politics either. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 00:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87fvzlepqu.fsf@invalid.invalid> |
| In reply to | #7596 |
On 2013-03-23, Roger Blake wrote: > On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> Sorry, didn't see that. Maybe you could re-post it so we can >> see how many variables were controlled for. > > After installing Ubuntu Linux a few years ago (I don't recall the > version) I wound up burning a lot of coasters. Poking around the system I > discovered there was some thing called "wodim" installed instead of the > "cdrecord" that I had come to expect. So I downloaded and installed > cdrtools and the problem went away. (Same burner, same package of discs, > same source material.) > > This is obviously anecdotal and not a statistically valid sample, but > as the saying goes "it works for me." Since having that experience, > with each subsequent update to a new version of Linux (currently Xubuntu > 12.04), I download and install cdrtools as a matter of course. It's a datapoint. It's not anecdotal. There is something broken in Debian's CD burning software, and I'm not sure what it is. I'd guess it has to do with how different drives deal with burning. I don't recall exactly, but I think I also got *positive* results. Hardware *is* in the mix, because Debian's tools seem to be unable to work with a set of optical burners. Joerg's mention of the media size would make sense. I am also used to see a lot of "drive returns wrong startsec, using ..." (sic?) when using cdrtools. That has always made me wonder if Debian's incarnation is using the wrong value. (A childish assumption, as there are so many other things that may go wrong.) Anyone knows what is the upstream's opinion on these issues? > As I've said, I really don't know or care about the politics and > personalities involved in the dispute between Debian and Mr. Schilling. > I just prefer to use what I have found to work best. (Of course your mileage > may vary.) -- Nuno Silva (aka njsg) http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-23 23:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <c3r3t.293365$Q91.161101@newsfe26.iad> |
| In reply to | #7601 |
On 2013-03-23, <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 2013-03-23, Roger Blake wrote: > >> On 2013-03-23, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Sorry, didn't see that. Maybe you could re-post it so we can >>> see how many variables were controlled for. >> >> After installing Ubuntu Linux a few years ago (I don't recall the >> version) I wound up burning a lot of coasters. Poking around the system I >> discovered there was some thing called "wodim" installed instead of the >> "cdrecord" that I had come to expect. So I downloaded and installed >> cdrtools and the problem went away. (Same burner, same package of discs, >> same source material.) >> >> This is obviously anecdotal and not a statistically valid sample, but >> as the saying goes "it works for me." Since having that experience, >> with each subsequent update to a new version of Linux (currently Xubuntu >> 12.04), I download and install cdrtools as a matter of course. > > It's a datapoint. It's not anecdotal. There is something broken in > Debian's CD burning software, and I'm not sure what it is. > > I'd guess it has to do with how different drives deal with burning. I > don't recall exactly, but I think I also got *positive* results. > > Hardware *is* in the mix, because Debian's tools seem to be unable to > work with a set of optical burners. Joerg's mention of the media size > would make sense. > > I am also used to see a lot of "drive returns wrong startsec, using ..." > (sic?) when using cdrtools. That has always made me wonder if Debian's > incarnation is using the wrong value. (A childish assumption, as there > are so many other things that may go wrong.) > > Anyone knows what is the upstream's opinion on these issues? Well, the original upstream is Jorg and you know what his opinion is. Wodim is cdrtools from 2006 plus some changes. AFAIK it has received very little attention since then, so upstream does not exist anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 09:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <874ng1e0zx.fsf@invalid.invalid> |
| In reply to | #7604 |
On 2013-03-24, unruh wrote: > On 2013-03-23, <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> (Nuno Silva) > <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Hardware *is* in the mix, because Debian's tools seem to be unable to >> work with a set of optical burners. Joerg's mention of the media size >> would make sense. >> >> I am also used to see a lot of "drive returns wrong startsec, using ..." >> (sic?) when using cdrtools. That has always made me wonder if Debian's >> incarnation is using the wrong value. (A childish assumption, as there >> are so many other things that may go wrong.) >> >> Anyone knows what is the upstream's opinion on these issues? > > Well, the original upstream is Jorg and you know what his opinion is. > Wodim is cdrtools from 2006 plus > some changes. AFAIK it has received very little attention since then, so > upstream does not exist anymore. If wodim has no real upstream, I guess that would explain part of the problem... -- Nuno Silva (aka njsg) http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 16:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kin86d$n2h$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #7611 |
On Sunday, March 24th, 2013, at 09:00:02h +0200, Nuno Silva wrote:
> If wodim has no real upstream, I guess that would explain part of the
> problem...
The "upstream" is the Debian package maintainers.
Joerg Jaspert
Eduard Bloch
Steve McIntyre
Here is the relevant information from
<http://packages.debian.ORG/changelogs/pool/main/c/cdrkit/cdrkit_1.1.11-2/copyright>
QUOTE
This package was first debianized by Erik Andersen andersee@debian.org.
The current Debian maintainer is Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org>.
Co-maintainers: Eduard Bloch <blade@debian.org>,
Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org>
It is available as free download on
<https://alioth.debian.org/projects/debburn/>.
The package contains parts of zisofs-tools, downloaded from
<ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/fs/zisofs/>.
Upstream maintainers:
The upstream author of zisofs-tools is H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>.
The rest is maintained by the Debian maintainers; see above.
Other authors:
Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>, Eric Youngdale and many
others.
Names of relevant binary program(s) and copyright info have been adapted to
avoid the violation of the GPL license (as offered by Joerg Schilling) and the
obligations created by German laws.
UNQUOTE
As it takes some Debian developers all their time just to maintain
their packages, so I seriously doubt whether these Debian developers
are doing or have done any significant new development on the software
over the years since the fork.
cdrkit currently has 19 bugs (out of a total of 99), the oldest dated
December 12th, 2011 which have not even been "classified" (initial sorting
and response) by the cdrkit maintainers.
Surely this indicates a lack of activity in keeping the package
well maintained.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 13:46 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icsj3kpu77.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7627 |
J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> writes: > On Sunday, March 24th, 2013, at 09:00:02h +0200, Nuno Silva wrote: > >> If wodim has no real upstream, I guess that would explain part of the >> problem... > > The "upstream" is the Debian package maintainers. > > Joerg Jaspert > Eduard Bloch > Steve McIntyre > > Here is the relevant information from > > <http://packages.debian.ORG/changelogs/pool/main/c/cdrkit/cdrkit_1.1.11-2/copyright> > > QUOTE > > This package was first debianized by Erik Andersen andersee@debian.org. > The current Debian maintainer is Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org>. > Co-maintainers: Eduard Bloch <blade@debian.org>, > Steve McIntyre <93sam@debian.org> > > It is available as free download on > <https://alioth.debian.org/projects/debburn/>. > > The package contains parts of zisofs-tools, downloaded from > <ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/fs/zisofs/>. > > Upstream maintainers: > The upstream author of zisofs-tools is H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>. > The rest is maintained by the Debian maintainers; see above. > > Other authors: > Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>, Eric Youngdale and many > others. > > Names of relevant binary program(s) and copyright info have been adapted to > avoid the violation of the GPL license (as offered by Joerg Schilling) and the > obligations created by German laws. > > UNQUOTE > > As it takes some Debian developers all their time just to maintain > their packages, so I seriously doubt whether these Debian developers > are doing or have done any significant new development on the software > over the years since the fork. > > cdrkit currently has 19 bugs (out of a total of 99), the oldest dated > December 12th, 2011 which have not even been "classified" (initial sorting > and response) by the cdrkit maintainers. Can you provide a link? I don't see them. > Surely this indicates a lack of activity in keeping the package > well maintained. Here's a bug fix from 2012: http://dcs.nac.uci.edu/support/sysadmin/security/archive/msg08875.html Here's a Fedora list of cdrkit bugs: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/cdrkit Seems like there is only 1, it has someone assigned, and it's not a defect. "Port cdrtools to use NSS library for cryptography". -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 19:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kiniu3$l9h$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #7629 |
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:46:04 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > Can you provide a link? I don't see them. I was referring specifically to all Debian packages related to cdrkit source. <http://bugs.debian.ORG/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?ordering=normal;archive=0;src=cdrkit;dist=unstable;repeatmerged=0> It is interesting to note that a bug was reported in November, 2008 and a patch supplied to fix it -- http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=505381 One of the maintainers, Steve McIntyre, replied 9 days later "Cool, thanks. I'll take a look." Over 4 years later and no further action has been taken on the bug in reviewing or applying the patch or any further action on it. This behavior can be observed in bug reports for a number of other packages, eg <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=302907> In April 2005, a user reports a bug and supplies a patch to fix the problem. 7 years later people are still asking for the patch to be applied and the response from Debian person responsible is that they should get Debian privileges to apply the patch to the package if they want it fixed because, obviously, "he ain't gonna do it." Users may start to get the feeling of "What is the point in reporting a bug to Debian (or providing a fix" if it is just going to be ignored. > Here's a Fedora list of cdrkit bugs: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/cdrkit Fedora have a habit of closing bugs when a new version of Fedora is released regardless of whether the bug was ever acknowledged or fixed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 17:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icd2uopkwt.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7631 |
J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> writes: > On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:46:04 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > >> Can you provide a link? I don't see them. > > I was referring specifically to all Debian packages related to cdrkit source. > > <http://bugs.debian.ORG/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?ordering=normal;archive=0;src=cdrkit;dist=unstable;repeatmerged=0> > > It is interesting to note that a bug was reported in November, 2008 > and a patch supplied to fix it -- Here's an interesting one: k3b: Burns coasters when copying audio CDs As I understand, you needn't RAW mode if you write audio tracks from .wav files (possibly you never need it for CDDA tracks, if it's usual CDDA?). And so -raw96r option in second code is wrong. If k3b does this, possibly this cause a problem. Then, may be for RAW mode app needs priviledges, but k3b does not supply cdrecord piece with them for copying audio. So, you got a permissions error. >> Here's a Fedora list of cdrkit bugs: >> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/cdrkit > > Fedora have a habit of closing bugs when a new version of > Fedora is released regardless of whether the bug was ever > acknowledged or fixed. I've reported Fedora bugs. Nothing like that ever happened to me. In general, problems get fixed when they affect someone that can fix them. I've fixed a few, but haven't had any of those CD or DVD problems so I haven't tried to fix any of them. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" <njsg@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 21:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kinqmk$dht$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #7634 |
On 2013-03-24, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> writes: > >> On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:46:04 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >> >>> Here's a Fedora list of cdrkit bugs: >>> >>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/cdrkit >> >> Fedora have a habit of closing bugs when a new version of >> Fedora is released regardless of whether the bug was ever >> acknowledged or fixed. > > I've reported Fedora bugs. Nothing like that ever happened to me. > > In general, problems get fixed when they affect someone that can fix > them. I've fixed a few, but haven't had any of those CD or DVD problems > so I haven't tried to fix any of them. And, just like all this "wodim works" thing, that it never happened to you does not mean it doesn't happen. Fedora is to bug tracking systems like some web fora moderators are to webfora: "oh it's old you can't reply to it". -- Nuno Silva (aka njsg) http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-24 20:08 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Why are mkisofs ISO's so large? Fedora bug tracking |
| Message-ID | <icr4j4nxy1.fsf_-_@home.home> |
| In reply to | #7635 |
"Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg)" <njsg@invalid.invalid> writes: > On 2013-03-24, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> J G Miller <miller@yoyo.ORG> writes: >> >>> On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:46:04 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >>> >>>> Here's a Fedora list of cdrkit bugs: >>>> >>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/bugs/cdrkit >>> >>> Fedora have a habit of closing bugs when a new version of >>> Fedora is released regardless of whether the bug was ever >>> acknowledged or fixed. >> >> I've reported Fedora bugs. Nothing like that ever happened to me. >> >> In general, problems get fixed when they affect someone that can fix >> them. I've fixed a few, but haven't had any of those CD or DVD problems >> so I haven't tried to fix any of them. > > And, just like all this "wodim works" thing, that it never happened to > you does not mean it doesn't happen. Fedora is to bug tracking systems > like some web fora moderators are to webfora: "oh it's old you can't > reply to it". I've reported bugs more than once. I gotten replies, action and fixes too. Sorry you didn't have the same experience. Fedora bug tracking is free in both senses of the word. I can't see criticizing it under any circumstance. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web