[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: xcdroast



Marc Demlenne wrote:
I'm using the Kernel 2.6.8
I do not have SCSI emulation configured for this because I was under the
 impression that it was no longer required for the 2.6 kernel.



Hi,
Got the same problem. When recompiling my 2.6 for the first time, i
switched off SCSI emulation as it's said not to be needed any more.

But xcdroast still _does_ need SCSI emulation. If you take a look on
their site, you'll see :

"I had several reports that the last 2.6.x kernel broke CD-Writing
using the ATAPI driver. Don't update if you want to continue to use
X-CD-Roast, or switch back to SCSI-emulation."

So there's no other solution ! You still use scsi emulation, even with
2.6, or yuou take smthg else to burn your CD.

By the way, i post another question... What's the best way to burn
CD's under Linux ? xcdroast used to be a must, but doesn't seem to be
well maintained any more, does it ? Maybe it's still a must anyway ?

Another way to burn is to do this manually, on console line. Not the
easiest way, but a reliable one !
You can take a look at CD-Burning howto, it's not so difficult !
Good luck !



I was able to get the scsi emulation turned back on easily enough. And it did burn one CD, the one I needed. But now I need to access the stupid thing and I have no idea which device it really is.
sr1 (according to dmesg) isn't it
hdc isn't it
sg0 isn't it
sg1 isn't it

I wish to god someone would come up with a better way of managing these devices. It's one thing to know what device branch it's under, it's another to have 169 possibilities under that branch with most of them dead ends.

Very frustrated.

I'll try upgrading to 2.6.9 and removing all the SCSI stuff for now.
I need to access the disk more than anything right now.

This brings up another point. How are you supposed to know what USB device is assigned to a USB storage device? My only solution is to plug it in and watch the logs. Are there any better alternatives?



Reply to: