Reusing DVD+RW disks with cdrecord
in [General Linux]
|
From: unruh on 27 Jun 2010 02:02 On 2010-06-26, Aragorn <aragorn(a)chatfactory.invalid> wrote: > On Saturday 26 June 2010 18:41 in comp.os.linux.misc, somebody > identifying as mjt wrote... > >> On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 11:31:42 +0100 >> Darren Salt <news(a)youmustbejoking.demon.cu.invalid> wrote: >> >>> Broken or not, >> >> You'd rather use a broken package? >> >>> it is at least distributable. >> >> And you're saying cdrtools isn't? > > I'm no lawyer or license guru, but it does deserve to be mentioned that > Joerg Schilling's "cdrtools" is licensed under the CDDL, > while "wodim" - i.e. the "broken" variant - is licensed either under > the GPL or a compatible Free Software license - the BSD or Apache > license, perhaps. wodim, which is an ancient version of cdrtools, with a few alterations-- mainly so it can burn dvds-- is licenced under GPL. The modern cdrtools ( which has received constant development over the past 5 years since the branch occurred) is licensed under CDDL. Both are open source licenses, with some differences. There is less of a difference between CDDL and GPL 2 than between GPL2 and GPL3. It is almost certainly any GPL3 program which is undistributable in combination witht he GPL2 kernel (Torvald has stated that he will never distribute the kernel under GPL3). The only issue with licenses is whether or not the license holder will sue if the software is distributed and SChilling has stated many many times in public, that he has no problem at all in cdrtools being distributed. Part of the issue is personality. Schilling can be rather abrasive at times, and some people do not like to be abraded. My philosophy is that if the software is good, it is the duty of the distributor like the distribution vendors to distribute. Many many people have started writing cdwriting software, but none have kept at it. Schiling has kept at it, writing good useful software, for well over 10 years. Alternatives where the writer looses interest after a year are useless. > > "cdrtools" is freely downloadable from Schilling's repository, but I > don't know whether the CDDL supports distribution by third parties. > Like I said, I'm neither a lawyer nor a license guru. ;-) Yes, cddl does allow distribution by third parties. >
From: unruh on 27 Jun 2010 02:08 On 2010-06-26, John Hasler <jhasler(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > Aragorn writes: >> ..."wodim" - i.e. the "broken" variant - is licensed either under the >> GPL or a compatible Free Software license - the BSD or Apache license, >> perhaps. > > GPL. And it works fine. No it does not. It works fine for some but does not work for others. This thread started with statements by users of the failure of wodim. Now just because it workd fine for you does not mean it works fine for all. You know that. > >> "cdrtools" is freely downloadable from Schilling's repository, but I >> don't know whether the CDDL supports distribution by third parties. > > It does, but cdrtools includes both GPL and CDDL code, and the licenses > are incompatible. This might be ok if all authors grant permission, but > that should be made explicit and has not been. More troublesome is the Schilling has stated that he has permission from all the writers to do so. > fact that Schilling has threatened Free Software developers with legal I beleive that was over the issue of the name. Other writers had changed cdrtools and kept the name cdrecord. Those changes, in Schilling's opinion had introduced bugs which had destroyed cdrtools, and were ruining his reputation as a software writer. > action. All of this has caused many to conclude that is is best to > avoid cdrtools. To the detriment of the users of those distributions.
From: Darren Salt on 27 Jun 2010 08:42 I demand that unruh may or may not have written... > On 2010-06-26, John Hasler <jhasler(a)newsguy.com> wrote: [snip] >> It does, but cdrtools includes both GPL and CDDL code, and the licenses >> are incompatible. This might be ok if all authors grant permission, but >> that should be made explicit and has not been. More troublesome is the > Schilling has stated that he has permission from all the writers to do so. He needs to show that he has these permissions; including all relevant mail in an appropriate place in the source would be a good way of doing this. (I'm not aware of him having done so.) [snip] -- | Darren Salt | linux at youmustbejoking | nr. Ashington, | Toon | using Debian GNU/Linux | or ds ,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | back! | + At least 4000 million too many people. POPULATION LEVEL IS UNSUSTAINABLE. Asimov of Borg: The Three Laws Of Assimilation.
From: Baho Utot on 27 Jun 2010 18:53 Darren Salt wrote: > I demand that unruh may or may not have written... > >> On 2010-06-26, John Hasler <jhasler(a)newsguy.com> wrote: > [snip] >>> It does, but cdrtools includes both GPL and CDDL code, and the licenses >>> are incompatible. This might be ok if all authors grant permission, but >>> that should be made explicit and has not been. More troublesome is the > >> Schilling has stated that he has permission from all the writers to do >> so. > > He needs to show that he has these permissions; including all relevant > mail in an appropriate place in the source would be a good way of doing > this. > > (I'm not aware of him having done so.) > > [snip] He hasn't. Only made claims with no way to verify. When asked to dual license GPL and CDDL there is no response. Lookup at the mess he made in Arch linux message base arch-general.
From: Mark Hobley on 6 Jul 2010 14:49
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 09:38:56 -0500, mjt wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:20:54 +0000 (UTC) Mark Hobley > <markhobley(a)yahoo.donottypethisbit.co> wrote: > > [snipped] >> The man page doesn't actually say. The only reference to erase is as >> follows: >> >> Note that for unknown reason, the DVD-Plus alliance does not like that >> there is a simulation mode nor a way to erase DVD+RW media. DVD+RW only >> supports one write mode that is close to Packet writing; this mode is >> selected in cdrecord via a the -dao/-sao option. >> >> That doesn't really make much sense to me. Anyhow it turns out that to >> reuse a disk, just insert it into the drive, and perform the record >> operation as normal. > > Makes sense to me ... erasing first, then recording over that erased > space is redundant - "recording over" is simply an erase-on-the-fly > operation. The thing that did not make much sense was the way that the man page is worded. However, that is easy enough to fix, now I know how it works. The document talks about the DVD Plus Alliance, simulation mode, "nor away" (which is a grammatical error), write modes and packets, but doesn't actually tell me anything about the behaviour of cdrecord. Cheers, Mark. -- /local/home/mark/.Signature --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news(a)netfront.net --- |