Volkan YAZICI wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Feb 2009, asdf asdf writes:
>> What is the "best" DVD writing solution "without GUI"? :D
>wodim.
wodim does not support to write DVDs.
wodim is a dead fork from an extremely outdated cdrecord release where the
working DVD support from the original software was
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> >> "Unfortunately Sun then developed the CDDL[1] and Jörg Schilling
> >> released parts of recent versions of cdrtools under this license."
> >>
> >> True.
> >Given the fact that attacking Sun (the largest donator of OpenSOurce
> > software) is definitely FUD, w
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> On Saturday 17 January 2009, Joerg Schilling
> wrote about 'Re: k3b & brasero don't
> work, nerolinux does- works ar 2X':
> >Chris Bannister wrote:
> >> http://lwn.net/Articles/198171/
> >
> >
Chris Bannister wrote:
> Maybe Jörg could comment on the below article:
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/198171/
Let me answer as quick as your question was:
Everything starting with the word "Unfortunately" in this article is plain FUD.
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jör
Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Joerg Schilling:
> >
> > As mentioned before: cdrkit is neither free nor working.
>
> Jörg, is there anything we can do to make you recognize the fact that
> there are different opinions on that subject and that there is no sense
> in trying to
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> >So you are happy if someone givey you pre-alpha's and calls them "stable"?
> >This sounds really strange.
>
> My first requirement is that the release team does not feel the need to use
> the qualifier "alpha". I did not say that was my only condition. Please
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> >The minimum requirements one need to have on a "stable release" is that it
> >does not have known bugs at the time of piublishing.
>
> We have different requirements for a stable release.
>
> >Cdrecord had 50 stable releases that match the requirements within th
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> On Friday 2009 January 09 09:25:31 Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >There recently have been some mails from Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. and
> >Johannes Wiedersich that have not been send to me, so it seems that the
> >authors are
There recently have been some mails from Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. and
Johannes Wiedersich that have not been send to me, so it seems that the
authors are not interested in a discussion. Their mail contained the usual
accusations: the claim that cdrtools is not free and that there is no
John Hasler wrote:
> > The people behind wodim do not follow the conditions of the GPL and they
> > do not follow the conditions in the higher worthy Urbebertrechts law.
>
> > Whether the name is used directly or via a symlink does not matter. The
> > original names are used without permission an
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." wrote:
> On Wednesday 2009 January 07 10:23:52 Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > The problem with wodim is that it is not a real fork.
> > A fork is something that is supported,
>
> Not true. "In so
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Debian on the other side violates GPL and Urheberrcht with the cdrkit fork.
> >
>
> I've seen you say that several times on this thread (an in other times),
> but I've missed the explanation of exactly
John Hasler wrote:
> Joerg.Schilling writes:
> > This seems to be an interesting claim.
>
> > If you only believe a lawsuit in court, then you would obviously not
> > believe the
> > claims from Debian. Nice to see!
>
> Debian is accusing no one of copyright infringement.
In case you did no
John Hasler wrote:
> Joerg.Schilling writes:
> > On the other side, Debian introduced problems with GPL and Urheberrecht
> > in the fork so wodim/cdrkit cannot be legally distributed (see above).
>
> When and in what court was your lawsuit filed? Where can we read the
> decision? If no suit has
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>Joerg doesn't like wodim, because he doesn't really believe people should be
>able to fork his code. (He is the primary developer of cdrecord.) His
This is wrong. The problem with wodim is that it is not a real fork.
A fork is something that is supported, but wodi
Paul Cartwright wrote:
> > We had a server outage last weekend. If you still have problems, ask your
> > ISP for help, thousands of people are using ftp.berlios.de without any
> > problem.
> >
> > Jörg
>
> I am having problems getting to this site and downloading updates:
>
> http://freshmeat.net
Please keep me on the CC!
Paul Cartwright wrote:
>> I recommand to have a look at the latest release (2.01.01a55) in
>> ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/
>> make sure to be root when calling make install, to allow cdrecord to be
>> installed suid root as needed on Linux.
>I have a48
>f
Chris Bannister wrote:
>Are you sure it it using the "new cdrecord"?
What do you understand by "new cdrecord"?
wodim has been created from a very old version of cdrecord
by adding new bugs and by changing things in a way that
makes wodim be in conflict with the GPL and the Cop
>Configuring Cdrkit, version 1.1.9
>CMake Error at wodim/CMakeLists.txt:18 (MESSAGE):
> Error: found a Linux system but no libcap header. Install libcap-dev.
Thanks! this is another hint that wodim is in conflict with the GPL.
Some notes:
k3b works best with cdrecord as cdrecord is well main
>> $ cdda2wav dev=/dev/hdc -t 4
>>. How can manage things so to omit the device specification?
> when I do: icedax -t 4 (now (in debian) cdda2wav is a symbolic link to
> icedax)
> I get:
> icedax: No such file or directory. Cannot open '-1'. Cannot open SCSI driver.
> icedax: For possible
>If the inclusion of cdrecord into GPL-strict Linux distros were
>important to you (I'm assuming it ain't, why should it) you could
>just GPL it and take the wind out of the stupid Debian maintainers'
>sails. After all it's you who insists that the CDDL and the GPL are
>compatible.
It seems that y
>Fixating...
>Errno: 0 (Success), close track/session scsi sendcmd: no error
>CDB: 5B 00 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
>status: 0x2 (CHECK CONDITION)
>Sense Bytes: 70 00 02 00 00 00 00 10 00 00 00 0E 04 08 00 80
>Sense Key: 0x2 Not Ready, Segment 0
>Sense Code: 0x04 Qual 0x08 (logical unit not ready, lo
Steve Kemp wrote:
> Please stop feeding the troll.
Well, it seems that you did also feed this troll.
Sometimes it is hard to stay quiet, in special if someone publishes incorrect
claims about free software. I believe it is important to post real numbers
after someone tried to lower the number o
> Yes, I can see that the Debian community is having an absolutely
> terrible time trying to get wodim to work. Six "Important bugs."
Nice trolling attempt
let me forward _unedited_ real numbers instead of your fake:
Outstanding bugs -- Important bugs; Patch Available (1 bug)
Ou
> > The real problem is a problem caused by the fact that the people
> > who "created" the wodim "project" don't like to cooperate in a way
> > that results in quality. I cannot accept patches that don't fix
> > the problems they are intended to fix but introduce bugs instead.
> Hey Joerg
>> What's stopping cdrecord from being in Debian alongside wodim?
> Its license (mix). Many people see various problems:
> http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/006193.html
> http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/
> http://lwn.net/Articles/199061/
> He is mixing CDDL with GPL code and even
> Wodim is nothing but a fork of a quite old version of cdrecord and, as
> far as I know, only exists inside Debian. The main reason for this fork
> are a dispute over Jörg Schilling's (cdrecord author) licensing and (at
There is a lot of missinformation spread from a few Debian people.
These p
>Hello, that is apparently a long story if you start to read into it. It
>has somenthing to do with licensing and philosophy. As far as I can tell
The story has nothing to do with licensing or philosophy but with the missing
will for quality oriented collaboration with the Author.
The attacks ag
>Ok, I am going to install wodim (I've never used it, may take me days
>to learn it). Years ago, seems everyone used cdrecord for burning CD.
>Is it in now days that the wodim is more popular than the cdrecord?
Why do you believe that an extremely outdated version from cdrecord
where somebody ev
>I have been using the command:
> mkisofs -J -v -l -r -o file.iso directory
> to create an iso image for burning to cd. Never had any problem with it
> until recently when a couple of my friends started complaining that they
> were unable to read those cds in windows.
> Upon investigating,
> > The CDDL is a free software license that gives more freedom than the GPL
> > does
> > and it is definitely accepted even by Debian.
> It's accepted by Debian? I've never seen any consensus that it's
Of yourse it is and if you really care, you of course have no problem to find
the related
> do not make me out for a liar without any proof from your side. in
> intended to send you a bugreport after conclusive trials: i still do
> *when i have time*: i am a working man with a rather large family.
I do not call you a liar, I just explain that it is impossible to deal with
unspeci
>dvd+rw-tools:
> .allways success. just curious after all the things schily writes on
> his website about wodim ao. am a kind of practical. found out that
> schily's latest beta of cdrecord on my machine gives unsurmountable
> problems: destroyed without a warning two brandnew cdroms. the l
>I have both cdrecord (Cdrecord-Clone 2.01.01a01) and wodim (1.1.6) on my
>Sarge system. I'm using kernel 2.6.22 right now.
This is a very very old version of cdrecord!
It is definitely unable to work around the bugs in a Linus-2.6 kernel.
Use a recent version of cdrecord
http://cdrecord.berli
>"I have an Etch box with a linux-image-2.6.18-5-k7. All works well but
> wodim -devices
> Beginning native device scan. This may take a while ...
> wodim: Invalid argument. Cannot Set SG_SET_TIMEOUT
>Apt-get install wodim confirms I have the latest release. I have also
>run apt-get
> I have an Etch box with a linux-image-2.6.18-5-k7. All works well but
>
>wodim -devices
>Beginning native device scan. This may take a while ...
>wodim: Invalid argument. Cannot Set SG_SET_TIMEOUT
>
> Apt-get install wodim confirms I have the latest release. I have also
> run a
>I only asked the question, as I thought there might be a diagnostic tool that
>could interrogate the cdrom drive to see if all was ok.
># cdrecord --devices seems to show the drive as available.
Cdrecord does not have a --devices option:
Calling this commandline will pass "ices" to the dev= o
> From time to time I grab a diferent OS to install and try my hands at
>it. This time was OpenSolaris. The thing is, at some point in the
>install, OpenSolaris throws a license at my face that doesn't seem open
>at all. I can run the software, but I can't redistribute, copy, etc. I
>am no law
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 07:24:11PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > >That is where you are wrong:
> >
> > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/09/msg2.html
> >
> > >
>That is where you are wrong:
>http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/09/msg2.html
> "Unfortunately Sun then developed the CDDL[1] and J=F6rg Schilling
> released parts of recent versions of cdrtools under this license.
> The CDDL is incompatible with the GPL. The FSF itself s
>Most tools like k3b, nautilus and xcdroast are designed to be pretty
>front-ends to cdrecord. Due to licensing issues with cdrecord, some
>Debian developers have created a fork called wodim. My understanding is
>that wodim is a drop-in replacement for cdrecord.
There has been a lot of FUD in th
>It appears that cdrecord package is ... deprecated in debain(?) I am
Indeed, Debian is somehow deprecated these days.
>trying to see what should I use to burn CD's from a terminal. This is on
>an Etch bases system with only icewm installed on it. I don't want to
>use nautilus cd burner a
>Since I have changed from Woody (2.4.27/32) to Sarge (2.6.8/16) I was
>not more able to burn CD's with the tools in Debian. I have created
>a private Debian Package from Jörgs cdrtools and now it works like
>expected. ONLY DVD-Burning (I have a LG) does not work currently...
What problems do y
>I think there has been a fork from the original cdrecord, and its author,
>because of some licensing issues. Debian has decided that it should remain as
>open source software and has removed any code that conflicts with this aim.
>So it is in flux I believe?
This is not true:
The original cdr
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brad Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've just installed a CD-Writer to my computer. I want
>to burn an ISO image, but I have problems with
>cdrecord. Can anybody show me how to use cdrecord
>properly since cdrecord doesn't seem recognize my
>CD-Writer? (It fails
45 matches
Mail list logo
