RE: .raw extension is misleading
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Hands [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> IIRC the .raw extension was chosen because xcdroast (or something
> similar) used that as it's default extension at the time debian-cd (or
> probably slink-cd) was being written.
> The .iso extension was chosen for the released CDs because it became
> apparent that many Windoze programs would choke on .raw file
That isn't so much the problem of 'Windoze' programs, but rather a
problem with the terminology in CD burning. So called RAW cd images
normally contain error correction data as found on burned CD's. Normal
(data) images do not contain that code.
Most modern ('Windoze') CD burning programs have the option of
extracting/burning the ISO file system only, or the complete (RAW) CD
including error correction data.
So, traditionally, ISO files contain an ISO file system, and RAW files
contain a real CD image. The problem is that quite a few CD burning
invented their own image format so things got a bit confused over time.
In any case, there is no need to call generated ISO file system images
.raw, and the most appropiate extension would be .iso.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org