Re: Sony DRU-510A, cannot burn dvd's on Solaris9 x386
>From appro@fy.chalmers.se Tue Jan 20 01:00:19 2004
>> >> from all the tests I've run .. I know it's a buffer overrun.
>>
>> >Buffer overruns are *not* denoted with "INVALID ADDRESS FOR WRITE," and
>> >should be handled by application transparently. *Unhandled* buffer
>> >underruns in turn *are* denoted as depicted in originating post. How do
>> >you come to the conclusion that it's overrun condition?
>>
>> This is definitely wrong!
>Can you be so kind and tell what exactly is "definitely wrong"? Given
>that "definitely wrong" implies "complete opposite is true". Do you mean
>that "buffer *overruns* are denoted with "INVALID ADDRESS FOR WRITE"? Or
>do you mean that "buffer *overruns* are not handled by cdrecord-ProDVD
>transparently"? Or do you mean that "*underruns* are never denoted as
>depicted in originating post"? I can agree that my *last* statement can
>be classified as "slightly wrong", as "buffer *underrun *can be* denoted
>as depicted in originating post" is more appropriate than "buffer
>*underrun* *is* denoted." But I can't agree that all of the above is
>"definitely wrong."
I am as verbose as you have been.....
It is obvious that "INVALID ADDRESS FOR WRITE" is a possible
result of a buffer underun.
I don't know what you mean by handling buffer underrun transparently in an
application?
>> It is relatively easy to prove the oposite!
>What is easy to refute? That "buffer underrun protection can't be
>switched off in DVD+? Or that "support for buffer underrun protection is
>mandatory for Incremental mode"? Or that "buffer underrun protection is
>optional in DAO mode"?
Burn proof can be switched on for DVD-
Please tell me why you are constantly writing wrong things trying people
to convince that DAO mode is worse then the packet Mode used by DVD+?
If you don't know enough about the behaviour of DVD- drives just stay silent.
It is simple to prove that e.g. Pioneer and Toshiba drives have a well
working buffer underrun protection for DVD- in DAO.
>> My tests with burnproof active did show that it works for DVD SAO writing.
>We have discussed this already. My experiments with initial SONY 500
>firmware has shown opposite, at least with real(!) recording. It most
Well, then the Sony just has a broken firmware. Why should there
be a buffer underrun protection mechanism if not to exactly protect
against the only write mode that would suffer from BUs?
>> The recording strategy used by growisofs gives less compatibility as
>> it does not write in SAO mode.
>We have discussed it too. Being way more practical Incremental strategy
>provides for *adequate* compatibility. I have not recieved a single
>report that media recorded in Incremental mode was less compatible that
>one recorded in DAO. A.
If you admid that we didcussed this already, why then do you constantly insist
in writing that growisofs is better?
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Reply to: