Burning music CDs
in [UK Linux]
|
From: unruh on 28 Jan 2010 02:06 On 2010-01-28, Paul Martin <pm(a)nowster.org.uk> wrote: > In article <7s8veaFfovU1(a)mid.dfncis.de>, > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > It's CD Kibo! > >> In article <slrnhlpcs8.r8t.pm(a)nowster.eternal-september.org>, >> Paul Martin <pm(a)nowster.org.uk> wrote: > >>> GNOME CD Master is a GUI frontend for creating audio CDs and >>> burning them using cdrdao. > >> The last version from cdrdao that added new features is from May 2005. > > So? Is it in need of new features? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Yes. Since that time, for example blueray has come out. Double sided DVDs, new DVD writers which have bugs in their firmware, etc. > >> There is a new version from October 2009 but this seems to be a step >> backwards as the main change (besides bug fixes) was to give up the >> use of the mature generic SCSI transport library "libscg" (the first >> version of this lib is from August 1986) and replaced it by >> howngrown non-portable code. > > Who wrote that, I wonder? > > Perhaps the licences were incompatible? I see that cdrdao is GPL2 (or > later), and so is incompatible with your pet licence. > >> Cdrtools is very actively maintained and exists since 14 years. > > Pity about it not being free software, though. It is free software. This is nonesense. > > Incidentally, we've been over all this before, the two of us, in > here. Rehashing it will not bring anything new to the discussion. >
From: unruh on 28 Jan 2010 02:07 On 2010-01-28, Paul Martin <pm(a)nowster.org.uk> wrote: > In article <7s95ouFl5kU1(a)mid.dfncis.de>, > Joerg Schilling wrote: >> In article <slrnhlsilf.49l.h(a)realh.co.uk>, >> Tony Houghton <h(a)realh.co.uk> wrote: > >>>growisofs is part of dvd+rw-tools; AFAIK it was developed independently >>>of cdrkit (or cdrtools). > >> Correct, but growisofs depends on mkisofs from cdrtools. > > Does it? Mine uses a program called genisoimage. It's not dependent on > it, as it can burn a pre-authored ISO or UDF image. genisoimage is mkisofs renamed. Who write the original on which this is based? >
From: Phil Stovell on 28 Jan 2010 06:50 On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 22:39:20 +0000, Nix wrote: > I can burn them and I can read them for as long as I can read CD-Rs, but > both give up the ghost completely after a few years. Sucky technology. CD-Rs I burned in 2002 as backups for digital photos still work perfectly.
From: Tony Houghton on 28 Jan 2010 09:28 In <slrnhm2dn8.8r3.unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca>, unruh <unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote: > On 2010-01-28, Paul Martin <pm(a)nowster.org.uk> wrote: >> >> Incidentally, do you have slander laws in Germany? > > Why, are you worried? No, probably wondering why JS complains so much about others acting "illegally", but freely commits libel against them. > It is the people who claim that CDDL and cdrtools violate the GPL that > surely need to justify their claim, not his claim that they do not. The author of the CDDL has stated publicly that it was deliberately based on a licence that is incompatible with the GPL. > He > is the author. It would be really really really hard for him to sue > anyone for using his software in combination with GPL given his > statements in many public fora. From what I've seen I doubt that would stop him from at least kicking up an even bigger fuss than he is now. Why do you think he changed the licence? It seems quite likely he had a grudge against Debian, thinking that their patches polluted his precious code, and tried to come up with a way that would force them to distribute it untouched, but didn't understand the licences properly. > Thus the only problem could be the > author of a GPL claiming that use of cdrtools violated GPL. Exactly how > does it violate the GPL? It is people claiming that who need to reveal > chapter and verse. The GPL isn't just about the authors' rights, it's about the users' rights, probably more so than the authors'. I don't know what action they could bring against Debian, but Debian can't adopt the position of, "We'll just ignore the small print because we don't think anybody can or will do anything about it." Even if only authors did matter, other authors were involved in developing cdrtools. They might not appreciate their rights being ignored. -- TH * http://www.realh.co.uk
From: Nix on 28 Jan 2010 16:01
On 28 Jan 2010, Paul Martin told this: > In article <7s8ummFbaeU1(a)mid.dfncis.de>, > Joerg Schilling wrote: > >> The last brasero I did see (maybe a bit old as it is from 2008) but it >> does not even find may burners and does not allow me to enter an >> address for the drive. > > What's wrong with /dev/dvd or /dev/cdrw? Let udev enumerate the devices. Those devices also have, y'know, permissions and ACLs and all the other good Unix stuff, automatically attached by udev. There's no *way* anything else could sensibly do the ConsoleKit hooking udev can do, spotting that a user is sitting in the seat and giving her ACLs to the sound card, the microphone, the *CD drive*... access it directly via sg and oops, that's gone. |