Re: Linux problems
"Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> wrote:
> Best for us would be if a shared lock would be
> aquired automatically and mandatorily with any
> call of open(). For vulnerable activities an
> interested process should upgrade it to an exclusive
> lock first (and downgrade to shared afterwards).
> The shared lock ends only by close().
If you still think about record locking, you are on the wrong way.
Anything that limits what's possible now would be a step back that I am not
willing to go. You should use google to search for problems caused by the
various hacks on cdrecord (libscg) by Linux distributors. They usually cause
cdda2wav and readcd not to work anymore.
As I mentioned many times before, locking is not an option. A minimal
scenario works on Solaris the way cdrecord is implemented since day 1.
Problematic cases are cases that implement multi-session on CDs or multi-border
on DVDs. For these cases, hald needs to be enhanced. But this is something
that is 5 years in the future for Linux if Linux evolves the way it currently
does.
Jörg
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Reply to: