Re: plextor px-708uf: cannot get disk type
> >> >> - a broken drive.
> >> >Again, since growisofs works, I doubt this, but perhaps cdrecord avails
> >> >itself of some facility that growisofs ignores. Is this the case? In other
> >> >words, WHY would growisofs either not have or not be stopped by this error,
> >> >while cdrecord is? Recall that cdrecord is fine with blank CD-Rs using the
> >> >same drive.
> >>
> >> A possible reason may be a bug in growisofs....
>
> >If growisofs didn't pay attention to the error code returned by the
> >command in question, I can assure that the recording would have failed
> >to start in some other way (or do I again know too little to assure
> >that?) The reason why growisofs doesn't get stuck on this is because it
> >doesn't try to squeeze the unit for every bit of information (most
> >likely partially bogus in this particular case), but asks only for
> >information relevant for the intended purpose. As I can assure that this
> >is actually intentional behaviour, it can't be classified as a bug. Yes,
> >it hides/avoids bugs in unit firmware and possibly Linux USB transport,
> >but it's not a coincidence or "lucky guess," but a result of
> >consideration which so to say paid off. A.
>
> Cdrecord does not squeeze the drive....
Did I say that cdrecord "squeezes the drive"? No! If I wanted to say
that, I'd say "Unlike cdrecord, growisofs..." But I said nothing of that
sort! I said that growisofs asks only for information I consider
required for intended purpose in a colorful way. I was basically
answering Thomas' question. Thomas! Did I answer the question "WHY would
growisofs either not have or not be stopped by this error?" I also tried
to point out that I don't share the opinion that growisofs success is
result of bug.
> it just does what the SCSI standard
> documents: Ask the drive how many bytes it is willing to provide and later
> retrieve them.
Good for cdrecord.
> You did not answer if growisofs always checks the SCSI Status byte.
There was no question "if growisofs always checks the SCSI Status byte"
[in fact I fail to find any question posed by you in previous post]. But
I think this unasked question was indirectly answered. Indeed, doesn't
"if growisofs didn't pay attention to the error code returned by the
command in question, [it would work at all]" mean "growisofs does pay
attention"? A.
Reply to: