Re: The legality of wodim
On Sat, Nov 10, 2007 at 04:51:21PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Josselin Mouette <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 16:39 +0100, Joerg Schilling a écrit :
> > > So make sure that "wodim" prints something like:
> > >
> > > "This program is known to have bugs that are not present in the original software"
> > >
> > > and it mets the rules.
> > Sorry, but we are not allowed to display false statements like this one..
> Finally stop spreding your FUD, the correctness of this statement is verified by
> the debian bug tracking system.
Just because no one bothers filing the bugs against the "origional"
anymore doesn't mean that they don't exist... or have you been through
the bugs and verified that none of them exist in your cdrtools? If not,
kindly shut the hell up. The fact that it's called wodim, is a perfectly
legitimate fork, and isn't actually affecting your reputation at all
(though you are, through prolonged idiocy and not bothering to take any
notice of what anyone tells you, just re-asserting that you and you
alone can read the GPL and that the rest of the world is wrong), and
that it's being actively maintained is enough. That it also mentions
that it is not in anyway affiliated with you should make you very happy.
Now, please stop flooding the lists with rubbish and do something