cd burning software for Solaris 10 SPARC

In article , Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
>js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (Joerg Schilling) writes:

>> I did get reports from people who did not see an error message from
>> cdrw (because it does not check SCSI error codes) and then had a
>> coaster without being warned.
>
>I ment to say you could elaborate more on the subject of why cdrecord
>is so much better then cdrw. Not just write a oneliner. In later msgs
>you do give more information, but also you leave a lot out.
>
>Nowhere do you say something about IDE writers. It's always scsi. I
>f.i. like the fact that cdrw does _not_ use/need scsi (emulation).

You seem to be one of the people who have been confused by incorrect statements
that may be frequently read from the Linux camp.

The only OS I know that supports SCSI emulation is Win-NT 5.0 or higher.

Solaris does _not_ support to emulate SCSI behavior on non-SCSI devices.
It should be obvious that you do not need something that is not available....


On the other side, there is _no_ CD/DVD writer that is based on IDE commands.
All CD/DVD writers support native SCSI commands as the only way to write the
media.

>Again: cdrecord is a very good program, but the world is large enough
>to have space for other progams that can also do a good job.
>Cdrw never gave me a toaster (yet). So why should I be displeased with
>it? Cdrw is good. Cdrecord might be better, or maybe I should say,

Solaris is not big enough to have an unsupported (or supported only
with extreme delays) program like cdrw. I had no problem if cdrw had an author
that was willing to compete, but this is defoinitely not the case. There are
many issues with cdrw and there are either never fixed or with a delay
of ~ 2 years. Given the fact that Sun still does tno have the power to support
putbacks from the OpenSolaris community in a decent way, it is a wast of time
to have cdrw on Solaris.

Many CD/DVD writers have firmware bugs and cdrecord implements workarounds for
these bugs. cdrw does not implement any such workaround.

ANd if you are interested in learning what cdrecord supports in advantage to
cdrw, I recommend to read the man page.

As cdrw claims to support audio extraction, you would need to compare
cdrecord+cdda2wav against cdrw. Do you expect that these programs need 8x as
much as sourcecode compared to cdrw just for fun?

If you compare cdrw with cdrtools, you see that mkisofs is missing and that
cdrw did never cross the limit for a proof of concept implementation.

--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

In article <46707454.5010000@comcast.net>,
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:

>> cdrecord -inq
>> Cdrecord-ProDVD-Clone 2.01.01a20 (i386-pc-solaris2.11) Copyright (C) 1995-2006
>> Jörg Schilling
>> Warning: Using USCSI interface.
>> Using libscg version 'schily-0.8'.
>> No target specified, trying to find one...
>> Using dev=1,0,0.
>> Device type : Removable CD-ROM
>> Version : 0
>> Response Format: 2
>> Capabilities :
>> Vendor_info : 'PLEXTOR '
>> Identifikation : 'DVDR PX-755A '
>> Revision : '1.06'
>> Device seems to be: Generic mmc2 DVD-R/DVD-RW/DVD-RAM.
>>
>> If no dev= option is specified, cdrecord scans SCSI for a single drive
>> in the system......
>>
>
>And if the box is all IDE? Say a Sun Ultra 10?

There is not a single CD/DVD writer that is based on IDE commands.
All known drives support SCSI.

BTW: the example was from my quad Opteron home machine with an ATAPI drive.

--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

In article ,
Michael Vilain wrote:

>> I did get reports from people who did not see an error message from
>> cdrw (because it does not check SCSI error codes) and then had a coaster
>> without being warned.
>
>Because I couldn't get it (or anything else you've written to run, e.g.
>star) to run on MacOS X. The weird make you use just doesn't work on my
>system. I suppose you'll point to my system as the problem. That's
>your option. I figure you're "doing your own thing" and don't bother
>with stuff you've written.

You post claims with no proof. smake is known to compile/work on more
platforms than GNU make. This is why it is supported.

If you have problem to compile my software on Mac OS X, try to ask your mother
on how to install a C compiler on Mac OS X.

All my software compiles with absolutely no problem on Mac OS X.
Support for Mac OS X started in 1997 with the first external beta....



--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

On 2007-06-14, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> In article ,
> Michael Vilain wrote:
>
>>> I did get reports from people who did not see an error message from
>>> cdrw (because it does not check SCSI error codes) and then had a coaster
>>> without being warned.
>>
>>Because I couldn't get it (or anything else you've written to run, e.g.
>>star) to run on MacOS X. The weird make you use just doesn't work on my
>>system. I suppose you'll point to my system as the problem. That's
>>your option. I figure you're "doing your own thing" and don't bother
>>with stuff you've written.
>
> You post claims with no proof. smake is known to compile/work on more
> platforms than GNU make. This is why it is supported.
>
> If you have problem to compile my software on Mac OS X, try to ask your mother
> on how to install a C compiler on Mac OS X.

Ah, the Dan Bernstein model of user support.

*plonk*

(Adds Schilling to the list of people whose software I will never use.)



--
"If only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker." ~ Albert Einstein
[email me at huge {at} huge (dot) org uk]

Joerg Schilling wrote:

> In article <5d89d4F33ghjcU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Frank Langelage wrote:
>>george.jones-at-gdc4s.com wrote:
>>> I have an Ultra 10 (440MHz/1GB RAM/20GB) running Solaris 10 and just
>>> replaced the CDROM with a CDRW drive. What burning software is
>>> available for it, or is there any at all. I'd like to be able to back
>>> up my work to CD.
>>>
>>
>>man cdrw
>
> Why do you recommend a program that hast been written after a better
> program did exist for a long time?

Maybe because that other program was written by you?

Alexander Skwar

Joerg Schilling wrote:

> In article ,
> Michael Vilain wrote:
>
>>> I did get reports from people who did not see an error message from
>>> cdrw (because it does not check SCSI error codes) and then had a coaster
>>> without being warned.
>>
>>Because I couldn't get it (or anything else you've written to run, e.g.
>>star) to run on MacOS X. The weird make you use just doesn't work on my
>>system. I suppose you'll point to my system as the problem. That's
>>your option. I figure you're "doing your own thing" and don't bother
>>with stuff you've written.
>
> You post claims with no proof.

Which is fine, as long as he's responding to what you write, since
you also never supply proof to your claims.

> smake is known to compile/work on more
> platforms than GNU make.

Nice. As long as "it" works on "my" platforms, that's "good enough".
At least for me.

Alexander Skwar

Joerg Schilling wrote:

> cdrw is harder to use than cdrecord (just call "cdrecord filename"
> or "cdrecord -v filename").

Geez. If it were somebody else, I now would have asked, if
you're serious. But you're of course never serious... I
mean, really, "cdrw -i file.iso" vs. "cdrecord file.iso".

> cdrecord supports more writers than cdrw.

If it supports my writer, than that is good enough for me.

> cdrw does not support the better SAO write mode.

"Better" - in what respect?

> cdrw does not support many things people would like to see.

Maybe they don't need those things?

Alexander Skwar

PS: When do you finally start to generate usenet messages,
which conform to standards?

In article <2202481.qh70HZozCD@kn.gn.rtr.message-center.info>,
Alexander Skwar wrote:
>Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
>> cdrw is harder to use than cdrecord (just call "cdrecord filename"
>> or "cdrecord -v filename").
>
>Geez. If it were somebody else, I now would have asked, if
>you're serious. But you're of course never serious... I
>mean, really, "cdrw -i file.iso" vs. "cdrecord file.iso".

Could you please limit your trolling to the Linux groups where
you are already well known as troll?

--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

In article , Huge wrote:
>On 2007-06-14, Joerg Schilling wrote:

>>>Because I couldn't get it (or anything else you've written to run, e.g.
>>>star) to run on MacOS X. The weird make you use just doesn't work on my
>>>system. I suppose you'll point to my system as the problem. That's
>>>your option. I figure you're "doing your own thing" and don't bother
>>>with stuff you've written.
>>
>> You post claims with no proof. smake is known to compile/work on more
>> platforms than GNU make. This is why it is supported.
>>
>> If you have problem to compile my software on Mac OS X, try to ask your mother
>> on how to install a C compiler on Mac OS X.
>
>Ah, the Dan Bernstein model of user support.

I don't know Dan Bernstein but I support people with problems and I make it
obvious when peopke are telling lies.

If this person did really have a problem, he did explain his problems.

--
EMail:joerg-at-schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js-at-cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling-at-fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

Joerg Schilling wrote:

> In article <2202481.qh70HZozCD@kn.gn.rtr.message-center.info>,
> Alexander Skwar wrote:
>>Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>
>>> cdrw is harder to use than cdrecord (just call "cdrecord filename"
>>> or "cdrecord -v filename").
>>
>>Geez. If it were somebody else, I now would have asked, if
>>you're serious. But you're of course never serious... I
>>mean, really, "cdrw -i file.iso" vs. "cdrecord file.iso".
>
> Could you please limit your trolling to the Linux groups where
> you are already well known as troll?

If you don't come trolling to the Linux groups, I might do
that, Mr. Troll.

Alexander Skwar