Hi, Rocky Bernstein > test/data/multi_extent_8k.iso | Bin 524288 -> 122880 bytes > I think both versions should be there. We should be testing not just how > things are created currently, but also how they may have been created in > the past.
I realize that i forgot to take into account your mail of Mon, 27 Mar 2023 09:11:32 -0400. But actually i wanted to ask back why you want to keep an ISO which was just created a bit wasteful for its purpose. It will never end up on a CD that gets written with write type TAO. Thus it needs no 300 KiB of padding. It will never be enlarged by multi-session. Thus a separate superblock for the first session is not needed. The padding compensates for mislead reading ahead by Linux when the drive firmware tells questionable read capacity which is invited by a bug in the SCSI specs. The separate superblock would survive the writing of a next session and stay mountable. Also it would be the starting point of the search for the chain of session superblocks. xorriso command -toc can then tell a session history like ISO session : 1 , 32 , 2024199s , HOME_2022_07_07_155642 ISO session : 2 , 2024256 , 26157s , HOME_2022_07_08_155953 ISO session : 3 , 2050432 , 32162s , HOME_2022_07_09_151801 ... ISO session : 267 , 11491200 , 52690s , HOME_2023_03_30_193636 ISO session : 268 , 11543904 , 44883s , HOME_2023_03_31_154321 Media summary: 268 sessions, 11584524 data blocks, 22.1g data, 976m free Linux or libcdio are supposed to use the first superblock at LBA 0 which always points to the newest session. So the old test ISO and the new one are equivalent as far as libcdio is concerned. If we keep the old ISO then there is no need to have the new one. It would only be more waste of space. Have a nice day :) Thomas
