Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #3615 > unrolled thread

Why are mkisofs ISO's so large?

Started byTodd <Todd@invalid.invalid>
First post2012-01-07 20:15 -0800
Last post2013-03-21 14:06 +0000
Articles 7 on this page of 147 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  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 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]


#3902

Fromunruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Date2012-01-26 07:41 +0000
Message-ID<jfr03n$815$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#3901
On 2012-01-25, Peter K??hlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> unruh wrote:
>
>> I do not dispute his right to be stubborn-- his producing the software
>> more than gives him the right to be so. I have a lot less sympathy for
>> the stubborness of the Debian people and all of the other distributions.
>> The key point is that the users suffer. 
>
> I don't suffer at all. I have *never* run his version. And I did not miss 
> anything

And you the self appointed representative of all users? Had you followed
this thread you would have discovered that the OP DID suffer. 

>
>> While one can download the
>> cdrtools and compile them, that in itself makes use by many users highly
>> unlikely.
>
> Right, but for totally different reasons. His tools will not provide any 
> functionality for my systems in addition to those I already have

And you think anyone cares?

>  
>> Since the kernel is GPL2 and ONLY GPL2, the
>> arguments of the Debian people should say that you simply cannot run
>> GPL3 software on any system that uses the Linux kernel.
>
> A real bullshit argument. 
> It is utter nonsense 

Cogent arguments you make. So deep insightful and logical.

>
>> Anyway, it is an illustration of the fact that without good will, the
>> most minor points can be blown up into major battles. 
>
> Well, J??rg certainly has no good will at all.
> And constantly lying about the subject will not make him any friends, either

Jorg has a lot of good will. He has spent many many years writing his
program, and keeping it updated. That takes a huge amount of talent and
since it is free, service to the community as well. 


>
>> If one cannot even
>> get Debian and Schilling together by enough to solve the cdrtools
>> problem for the users, 
>
> There isn't a "problem". The users don't miss them

Again, who elected you as the representative of all users. Many users DO
miss it. Debian has not updated the original version they spun off-- a
version incidentally written by Schilling, not by anyone at Debian. 


>
>> there is zero hope of solving problems like
>> Palestine, Iran, Iraq, ..... At least people have not died yet because
>> of this dispute.
>
> Why not mention world peace?
> Idiotic "argument".

I did mention world peace, but too elliptically for you. 
And exactly what did you read this as an argument for? 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#7516

FromJoerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de
Date2013-03-21 14:31 +0000
Message-ID<kif5kv$bn3$6@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#3887
In article <zrZTq.5432$_g3.3426@newsfe09.iad>, unruh  <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>On 2012-01-25, Loki Harfagr <l0k1@thedarkdesign.free.fr.INVALID> wrote:

>
>The key issue is an issue of licenses and the GPL. The debian people
>interpret the GPL in one way, a way that I believe holds much in
>sympathy with the way in which SCO interpreted the GPL in their famous
>attempt to extort money from Linux users. Schilling does not like the

Debian (when talking about cdrtools) interprets the GPL in a way that makes 
their entire distribution illegal.

You should ask them, why they are unwilling to use the same rules for all 
software.


>Anyway, it is an illustration of the fact that without good will, the
>most minor points can be blown up into major battles. If one cannot even
>get Debian and Schilling together by enough to solve the cdrtools
>problem for the users, there is zero hope of solving problems like
>Palestine, Iran, Iraq, ..... At least people have not died yet because
>of this dispute. 

I am not sure whether you are aware of this, but there was a meeting between 
Debian and me (accompanied by the OpenSource.org Director Simon Phipps).

This happened on March 6th 2009. Debian (Jörg Jaspert - the ftp masther in 
person) at that time promised to include the original cdrtools into the Debian 
distributuion within a few week. Nothing happened so far.

Ask Debian, why you cannot trust a promise made by 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]


#7515

FromJoerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de
Date2013-03-21 14:23 +0000
Message-ID<kif55r$bn3$5@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#3885
In article <pan.2012.01.25.18.33.24@thedarkdesign.free.fr.INVALID>,
Loki Harfagr  <l0k1@thedarkdesign.free.fr.INVALID> wrote:

>to be stubborn on an important point in free software distribution is a
>quality that should be supported, taught and shared, and that other point
>you said about another quality of Jörg Schilling is certainly true too :D)


Are people who insist in software quality and who insist in licence legality 
called stubborn?

Debian on the other side has a problem with software quality and the legality 
of their "wodim"....

-- 
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]


#7514

FromJoerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de
Date2013-03-21 14:21 +0000
Message-ID<kif514$bn3$4@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#3846
In article <lZqTq.4339$5r2.166@newsfe11.iad>, unruh  <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote:
>On 2012-01-23, Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 10 times faster!  And, I guy over on RPM Forge gave me a link to
>> Red Hat RPMS, including RHEL RPMs:
>>
>> http://www.city-fan.org/ftp/contrib/sysutils/cdrtools/
>>
>> Thank you!
>
>There is a totally idiotic pissing contest between Debian and Schilling, the
>writter of cdrtools. Schilling released cdrtools recently under CDDL.
>Debian does not like this (although they are happy with the totally
>incompatibility between GPL3 and GPL2) and have decided that that
>completely stupid, ancient version of cdrtools (7 years old now). The only ones that suffer are
>the users. Schilling on the other hand is pathelogically stubborn (and
>a great software creator). 

Let me give some minor corrections:

In May 2004, the Debian packetizer changed and the new one was not 
collaborative. After he tried to force me in vain to include a buggy so called 
"UTF-8 support patch" into mkisofs, I received a lot of personal attacks from 
him.

Later (in 2005), he claimed that there was a GPL license problem in "cdrecord"
even though all programs in cdrtools have been completely under GPL.

After it turned out, that even the Debian leaders have not been willing to 
correct this person, I started to relicense the sources under CDDL - but this 
was done as a result of the attacks from Debian.

Now "mkisofs" is still under GPL, but the rest of the programs are 100% CDDL.
Debian still claims that "cdrecord" has a GPL problem - even though cdrecord
is 100% CDDL. I am not sure whether there are people who understand this....

OpenSource still winns, as nobody is forced to use the binaries from Debian.

Users should however ask Debian why they are not able to solve an internal 
social problem within 9 years.

-- 
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]


#3899

FromTodd <Todd@invalid.invalid>
Date2012-01-26 10:38 -0800
Message-ID<jfs6j3$j0o$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#3841
On 01/23/2012 10:08 AM, Todd wrote:
> On 01/07/2012 10:03 PM, unruh wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> >
>>> > Why does
>>> >
>>> > mkisofs --dvd-video -o $Path/clean_dvd.iso $StruPath/$Label
>>> >
>>> > create such large ISOs? 6.2 GB vs 4.4 gb when I use a GUI utility
>>> > to create the iso. Did I miss some compression setting? What
>>> > am I doing wrong?
>>> >
>> First make sure you are using the real mkisofs.
>> cdrecord.belios.de
>> and not the ancient version in cdrkit.
>> What GUI utility are you using and yes there probably is some
>> compression setting, but I cannot help there.
>
>
> What a HUGE difference that made. My ISOs are now small and are created
> 10 times faster! And, I guy over on RPM Forge gave me a link to
> Red Hat RPMS, including RHEL RPMs:
>
> http://www.city-fan.org/ftp/contrib/sysutils/cdrtools/
>
> Thank you!
>
> -T

Hi Unruh,

Dag Wieers with RPM Forge just wrote me this:

> I can recommend using xorriso, we provide the latest xorriso versions from
> Repoforge. xorriso is a drop-in replacement for cdrecord and mkisofs
> using:
>
>  	xorriso -as cdrecord -help
>  	xorriso -as mkisofs -help

Haven't had a chance to try it (your solution is working perfectly).

-T

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#3619

Fromroot <NoEMail@home.org>
Date2012-01-08 15:50 +0000
Message-ID<jece03$gtm$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#3615
Todd <Todd@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> Why does
> 
>     mkisofs --dvd-video -o $Path/clean_dvd.iso $StruPath/$Label
> 
> create such large ISOs?  6.2 GB vs 4.4 gb when I use a GUI utility
> to create the iso.  Did I miss some compression setting?  What
> am I doing wrong?
> 
> Many thanks,
> -T

Mount the images via loopback to ensure they have
the same content. Sounds like a mistake somewhere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#7510

FromJoerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de
Date2013-03-21 14:06 +0000
Message-ID<kif458$bn3$2@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#3615
In article <jeb58h$9ne$1@dont-email.me>, Todd  <Todd@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Why does
>
>    mkisofs --dvd-video -o $Path/clean_dvd.iso $StruPath/$Label
>
>create such large ISOs?  6.2 GB vs 4.4 gb when I use a GUI utility
>to create the iso.  Did I miss some compression setting?  What
>am I doing wrong?

Are you using the original mkisofs or the buggy variant from Debian?

"genisoimage" is made from an original from September 2004 with many Debian 
specific bugs added.

-- 
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] | [standalone]


Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web