[gentoo-dev] xcdroast works again, -n parameter needed

[gentoo-dev] xcdroast works again, -n parameter needed

[Dan Armak]

Hi all,

I've fixed a bug in the cdrtools ebuilds, now they install the readcd binary 
correctly. xcdroast will now work again (it hadn't since we replaced 
app-cdr/cdrecord with cdrtools).

However, for it to start the -n parameter is needed, which turns off cdrecord 
version checking. Otherwise it won't start unless a cdrecord of a specific 
version number, which is hardcoded into the source code, can be located.

I don't know of any problems that may be caused by using a newer version of 
cdrecord than the one it wants, but there may have been a good reason to make 
it work that way. If we ascertain that it works OK with the newer versions, 
we'll need to to decide on a way to tell users to use the -n flag, or even to 
patch the source to make it unnecessary. Info? Ideas?

-- 

Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team
Matan, Israel

Re: [gentoo-dev] xcdroast works again, -n parameter needed

[Mikael Hallendal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1412 bytes --]

tis 2001-12-04 klockan 21.33 skrev Dan Armak:
> Hi all,

Hi!

Sorry for the late answer.
 
> I've fixed a bug in the cdrtools ebuilds, now they install the readcd binary 
> correctly. xcdroast will now work again (it hadn't since we replaced 
> app-cdr/cdrecord with cdrtools).

Great!
 
> However, for it to start the -n parameter is needed, which turns off cdrecord 
> version checking. Otherwise it won't start unless a cdrecord of a specific 
> version number, which is hardcoded into the source code, can be located.
> 
> I don't know of any problems that may be caused by using a newer version of 
> cdrecord than the one it wants, but there may have been a good reason to make 
> it work that way. If we ascertain that it works OK with the newer versions, 
> we'll need to to decide on a way to tell users to use the -n flag, or even to 
> patch the source to make it unnecessary. Info? Ideas?

Worked fine here. I think it would be ok to patch xcdroast (or can we
set some configure/compile-time flag to remove this check?)

I don't *think* it'll break the burning in the middle, it's probably to
ensure that flags are there and such, so we could always remove our
patch if versions of cdrecord start showing up that isn't supported.

Regards,
  Mikael Hallendal

-- 

Mikael Hallendal
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team Leader
CodeFactory AB, Stockholm, Sweden


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]