Re: cdrecord floating point exception

["Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net>]

Hi,

Matthias Andree wrote:
> http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/halfaq.html#q2

I'll put that into libburn docs.


Johannes Meixner's comment quoted by Matthias
> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438867#c23
> "Why the hell is this HAL stuff always all the time changing
>  arbitrarily ..."

I can only join in with his lament.
Since i hear about hald it is ever changing.

My very convenient killing of particular
hald-addon-storage processes does not work
for several users of my programs. They simply
see no such processes. Only the failures.

The mess begins already with the project
docs which naturally assume that everybody
is using a Mac-Windows-style computer
which by accident is based on Linux.
If HAL shall be a central system component
then it must have a stable C API and a
stable model of operations.

Another group of developers to blame are
those who began to depend on hald without
first insisting in said model and API.
I understand why a central device manager
is appealing. I would like to join in.
But not under these technical conditions,
and actually not so enthusiastically with
a project that appears quite naive.

Systemwide device management should not
depend on anything else than the core
system.

It is a bit like with CD burning:
Actually a task for the operating
system, not for user applications.
For some reason, the Linux kernel code
has a large hole of exactly the shape
of a sequential burn facility.
So we small people from userland have
our peculiar SCSI playground :))


Have a nice day :)

Thomas