Re: How reliable mkisofs' UDF support is?
Piszcz, Justin wrote:
I have read into this, the only way to successfully make a UDF CD is to
first make a loopback image, format that as UDF, put your files on it,
then burn the image.
Is it somehow different from something like:
"mkisofs -l -udf -o out.iso /PATH_TO_DIR"?
Are you using mkisofs to format a loopback image?
Essentially, it is not ready yet to flip a switch with mkisofs and
cdrecord like you can with joilet or iso9660.
But why not?
For maximum compatibility you should burn DVD's as UDF ver 1.02 or so,
burning DVD's with iso9660/joilet is a *BAD* idea, it also does not let
you write files bigger than 2GB to the disc.
Why it is a bad idea? And what if you just burn ISO/UDF DVDs, without
joilet?
After I found this out I moved my burner to a Windows machine and used
Nero and burn discs as UDF 1.02 and never had an issue with any of 20-40
discs I have burned recently in Linux or Windows.
It seems though that Nero's support of UDF does not follow the standard - or at
least so it seems to me, because I don't know UDF's restrictions, but Nero
does not allow filenames longer than 127 characters - mkisofs allows much
longer filenames.
Daniel.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel M. [mailto:quantera@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 12:01 AM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: How reliable mkisofs' UDF support is?
Hello,
Mkisofs's manpage says that it's UDF support is in alpha status, and
that "there
are many pitfalls with the current implementation". What does that
actually
means from user's perspective - does that means that one day CDs/DVDs
which
were burnt from images made by mkisofs with '-udf' option on may become
unreadable (maybe because of the lack of compliance with the standard),
that
data can become corrupted more easily or something equally bad?
Daniel.
Reply to: