Unidentified subject!
>From: Andy Polyakov <appro@fy.chalmers.se>
>> >> - 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....it just does what the SCSI standard
documents: Ask the drive how many bytes it is willing to provide and later
retrieve them.
You did not answer if growisofs always checks the SCSI Status byte.
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: