From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751278AbWBMOvM (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:51:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751280AbWBMOvM (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:51:12 -0500 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp10.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.170]:37247 "EHLO BAYC1-PASMTP10.BAYC1.HOTMAIL.COM") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751278AbWBMOvM (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:51:12 -0500 Message-ID: X-Originating-IP: [65.94.251.146] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:50:38 -0500 From: sean To: Joerg Schilling Cc: schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de, sam@vilain.net, peter.read@gmail.com, mj@ucw.cz, matthias.andree@gmx.de, lkml@dervishd.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jim@why.dont.jablowme.net, jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de Subject: Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) Message-Id: <20060213095038.03247484.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <43F097AE.nailKUSK1MJ9O@burner> References: <20060208162828.GA17534@voodoo> <43EA1D26.nail40E11SL53@burner> <20060208165330.GB17534@voodoo> <43EB0DEB.nail52A1LVGUO@burner> <43EB7210.nailIDH2JUBZE@burner> <43EB7BBA.nailIFG412CGY@burner> <43EC71FB.nailISD31LRCB@burner> <20060210114930.GC2750@DervishD> <43EC88B8.nailISDH1Q8XR@burner> <43EFC1FF.7030103@vilain.net> <43F097AE.nailKUSK1MJ9O@burner> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.4 (GTK+ 2.8.11; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2006 14:52:09.0515 (UTC) FILETIME=[10C047B0:01C630AD] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 15:29:02 +0100 Joerg Schilling wrote: > When looking at the current discussion, it seems to me that most people > here are still not interested in a fix. Most people don't see a problem to fix. Your arguments have been roundly refuted. On top of which, cdrecord works on Linux just fine already when you pass the device node on the command line. There just isn't much motivation to pursue a fix for some theoretical problem that doesn't affect real users in practice. Since you are the only one who sees this as a huge problem you should invest in providing a patch that can be reviewed for inclusion. Sean