FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-13-2008, 01:17 PM
Stephan Hermann
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Dear Colleagues,

as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
really wonder what way we should go.

Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.

Most of the apps I found in debian/ubuntu, which are using mkisofs/cdrecord as exec calls, could be patched easily to use genisoimage/wodin.
Having an option compatiblity between e.g. cdrecord and wodin, this should work out of the box.

Do you think it's worth the efford?

Regards,

sh

PS: Discussion on u-d-d, Reply-To set please honour it.


--
´╗┐SysAdmin, OSS Developer
GPG-Key ID: 0xC098EFA8
Fingerprint: 3D8B 5138 0852 DA7A B83F DCCB C189 E733 C098 EFA8
http://www.sourcecode.de/
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-13-2008, 03:29 PM
Thilo Six
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Stephan Hermann wrote the following on 13.01.2008 15:17

> Dear Colleagues,
>
> as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
> really wonder what way we should go.
>
> Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
> the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.
>
> Most of the apps I found in debian/ubuntu, which are using mkisofs/cdrecord
> as exec calls, could be patched easily to use genisoimage/wodin.
> Having an option compatiblity between e.g. cdrecord and wodin, this should
> work out of the box.
>
> Do you think it's worth the efford?
>
> Regards,
>
> sh
>
> PS: Discussion on u-d-d, Reply-To set please honour it.

Quote:
For Ubuntu, cdrtools is in multiverse...
according to packages.ubuntu.com cdrtools isn┤t in the archive since edgy and
even in edgy it is only a transitional package only iirc.


Quote:
The Gentoo Linux ebuild for cdrkit installs symlinks to provide compatibility
with applications looking for old cdrtools binaries:

/usr/bin/cdda2wav -> /usr/bin/icedax
/usr/bin/cdrecord -> /usr/bin/wodim
/usr/bin/mkisofs -> /usr/bin/genisoimage
/usr/bin/readcd -> /usr/bin/readom
+ a few more (manpages, etc)

Seems to work fine because, as you say, the cdrkit binaries take the same
options, and using symlinks saves on patching all the other applications
depending on cdrtools.
in the light of the above i think this is the easiest way.


--
bye Thilo

key: 0x4A411E09


--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-13-2008, 06:20 PM
Stephan Hermann
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Hi,

On So, 2008-01-13 at 17:29 +0100, Thilo Six wrote:
> Stephan Hermann wrote the following on 13.01.2008 15:17
>
> > Dear Colleagues,
> >
> > as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
> > really wonder what way we should go.
> >
> > Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
> > the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.
> >
> > Most of the apps I found in debian/ubuntu, which are using mkisofs/cdrecord
> > as exec calls, could be patched easily to use genisoimage/wodin.
> > Having an option compatiblity between e.g. cdrecord and wodin, this should
> > work out of the box.
> >
> > Do you think it's worth the efford?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > sh
> >
> > PS: Discussion on u-d-d, Reply-To set please honour it.
>
>
Quote:
> For Ubuntu, cdrtools is in multiverse...
>
>
> according to packages.ubuntu.com cdrtools isn┬┤t in the archive since edgy and
> even in edgy it is only a transitional package only iirc.

This is not correct...according to soyuz:
https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cdrtools/10:2.01.01a33-0ubuntu2 the last version was in gutsy...and the removal was requested on 2008-01-09.
Therefore we have several packages not working anymore

To sum up:

Two ways are valid:

1. We add "Provides" to the cdrkit binary packages and install
ln -s /usr/bin/<cdrkit binary name> /usr/bin/<cdrtools binary name>
2. We could provide patches for Debian/Ubuntu and Upstream to support
both ways..


I generated a list of source packages to find out what packages are
involved:

Hopefully with the correct output

Command:

´╗┐shermann@home-emt64:~$ for i in `grep-dctrl -F
Depends,Suggests,Recommends $SEARCHTERM /var/lib/apt/lists/*binary*|grep
Package|cut -d " " -f 2` ; do grep-dctrl -F Binary
$i /var/lib/apt/lists/*Source* | grep Package ; done

------------- $SEARCHTERM = mkisofs -----------------

Package: devede
Package: mythplugins
Package: aptoncd
Package: backup-manager
Package: backupninja
Package: bootcd
Package: nautilus-cd-burner
Package: xfburn
Package: burn
Package: cpuburn
Package: libburn
Package: mp3burn
Package: mybashburn
Package: cdrbq
Package: cdrw-taper
Package: cedar-backup2
Package: debian-cd
Package: dfsbuild
Package: ebox
Package: ebox-ca
Package: ebox-firewall
Package: ebox-network
Package: ebox-ntp
Package: ebox-objects
Package: ebox-openvpn
Package: jukebox-mercury
Package: libebox
Package: zeroc-ice
Package: fai
Package: fai
Package: gtoaster
Package: hubackup
Package: ichthux-meta
Package: kiso
Package: live-helper
Package: mindi
Package: mindi-busybox
Package: pybackpack
Package: systemimager
Package: videolink
Package: xcdroast

--------- $SEARCHTERM = cdrecord -----
Package: mythplugins
Package: arson
Package: backupninja
Package: bootcd
Package: nautilus-cd-burner
Package: xfburn
Package: burn
Package: cpuburn
Package: libburn
Package: mp3burn
Package: mybashburn
Package: cdbackup
Package: cdcontrol
Package: cdrbq
Package: cdrw-taper
Package: cedar-backup2
Package: gtoaster
Package: hubackup
Package: ichthux-meta
Package: lphoto
Package: mondo
Package: mp3roaster
Package: dpkg-multicd
Package: multicd


Some of those packages do have support for cdrkit, but some of them
don't. E.G. I patched qvamps to use wodim/genisoimage instead of
cdrecord/mkisofs. This tool doesn't even have autodetection. So this
could be a candidate for a professional cdrkit/cdrtools detection and
not only a quickpatch

But which way we go, this should be discussed here

Regards,
sh

--
´╗┐SysAdmin, OSS Developer
GPG-Key ID: 0xC098EFA8
Fingerprint: 3D8B 5138 0852 DA7A B83F DCCB C189 E733 C098 EFA8
http://www.sourcecode.de/
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-13-2008, 07:19 PM
Thilo Six
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Stephan Hermann wrote the following on 13.01.2008 20:20

Hi Stephan

>> according to packages.ubuntu.com cdrtools isn┤t in the archive since edgy and
>> even in edgy it is only a transitional package only iirc.
>
> This is not correct...according to soyuz:
> https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cdrtools/10:2.01.01a33-0ubuntu2 the last version was in gutsy...and the removal was requested on 2008-01-09.
> Therefore we have several packages not working anymore

jup you are right. I have searched the binary section only, not for source
package names

sorry for the noise.

</snip>

> Regards,
> sh

--
bye Thilo

key: 0x4A411E09


--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-14-2008, 12:51 PM
Forest Bond
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Hi,

On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 03:17:11PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
> really wonder what way we should go.
>
> Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
> the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.

Hold your horses, folks.

Didn't we just move back to cdrtools from cdrkit? Weren't these issues
resolved, or something?

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=270060

Debian seems to be happy. Let's leave it be, hmm?

Thanks,
Forest
--
Forest Bond
http://www.alittletooquiet.net
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-14-2008, 02:18 PM
Matthew Garrett
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:51:12AM -0500, Forest Bond wrote:

> Didn't we just move back to cdrtools from cdrkit? Weren't these issues
> resolved, or something?
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=270060

That's from 2005.

> Debian seems to be happy. Let's leave it be, hmm?

No - cdrtools still links GPLed code into a CDDLed binary. It's
undistributable in its current form.

--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-14-2008, 03:23 PM
Stephan Hermann
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Hi,

On Mo, 2008-01-14 at 15:18 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:51:12AM -0500, Forest Bond wrote:
>
> > Didn't we just move back to cdrtools from cdrkit? Weren't these issues
> > resolved, or something?
> >
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=270060
>
> That's from 2005.
>
> > Debian seems to be happy. Let's leave it be, hmm?
>
> No - cdrtools still links GPLed code into a CDDLed binary. It's
> undistributable in its current form.

So, regarding the removal of cdrtools form the archive, should we change
cdrkit binary packages to Provide: the old cdrtools binary package
names, and adding symlinks for the new binary tools to the old cdrtools
names, like gentoo is doing so?

This would be the easiest solution for now.

Regards,
sh

--
´╗┐SysAdmin, OSS Developer
GPG-Key ID: 0xC098EFA8
Fingerprint: 3D8B 5138 0852 DA7A B83F DCCB C189 E733 C098 EFA8
http://www.sourcecode.de/


--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 01-14-2008, 03:24 PM
Matthew Garrett
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 05:23:11PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:

> So, regarding the removal of cdrtools form the archive, should we change
> cdrkit binary packages to Provide: the old cdrtools binary package
> names, and adding symlinks for the new binary tools to the old cdrtools
> names, like gentoo is doing so?

Yes.

--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 02-07-2008, 09:57 AM
Matt Zimmerman
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 03:17:11PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
> really wonder what way we should go.
>
> Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
> the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.
>
> Most of the apps I found in debian/ubuntu, which are using mkisofs/cdrecord as exec calls, could be patched easily to use genisoimage/wodin.
> Having an option compatiblity between e.g. cdrecord and wodin, this should work out of the box.
>
> Do you think it's worth the efford?

It would be preferable, I think, to resolve the licensing issues with
cdrtools, but others (particularly in Debian) have attempted this with
upstream over a long period of time without much success (which is why
cdrkit was created).

What we must decide is whether we're prepared to give up, as Debian did, or
if we can continue to pursue this. There was an active discussion between
the upstream author and members of the Technical Board, but it seems to have
died out.

> PS: Discussion on u-d-d, Reply-To set please honour it.

This is on-topic for ubuntu-devel.

--
- mdz

--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
 
Old 02-07-2008, 09:57 AM
Matt Zimmerman
 
Default Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 03:17:11PM +0100, Stephan Hermann wrote:
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> as I wrote on http://www.sourcecode.de/content/cdrkit-vs-cdrtools I
> really wonder what way we should go.
>
> Regarding the non-freeness of cdrtools, we should concentrate on getting
> the cdrkit binaries to the upstream projects.
>
> Most of the apps I found in debian/ubuntu, which are using mkisofs/cdrecord as exec calls, could be patched easily to use genisoimage/wodin.
> Having an option compatiblity between e.g. cdrecord and wodin, this should work out of the box.
>
> Do you think it's worth the efford?

It would be preferable, I think, to resolve the licensing issues with
cdrtools, but others (particularly in Debian) have attempted this with
upstream over a long period of time without much success (which is why
cdrkit was created).

What we must decide is whether we're prepared to give up, as Debian did, or
if we can continue to pursue this. There was an active discussion between
the upstream author and members of the Technical Board, but it seems to have
died out.

> PS: Discussion on u-d-d, Reply-To set please honour it.

This is on-topic for ubuntu-devel.

--
- mdz

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ę2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org