[gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Yoav Luft]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 502 bytes --]

Hi,
I posted a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago and got no response. I wish
not to spam the mailing list, only for maybe a better luck this time.
My CD ROM drive had stopped playing audio CD's. It still works fine, data
CD's work alright and various programs manage to gather useful information
about the audio CD's tracks, but I hear nothing. I checked all controls in
alsamixer to be unmuted and at reasonable volume, but it's not it. I can't
rip the CD's neither. Any ideas what might be wrong?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 536 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Uwe Thiem]

On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Yoav Luft wrote:
> Hi,
> I posted a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago and got no
> response. I wish not to spam the mailing list, only for maybe a
> better luck this time. My CD ROM drive had stopped playing audio
> CD's. It still works fine, data CD's work alright and various
> programs manage to gather useful information about the audio CD's
> tracks, but I hear nothing. I checked all controls in alsamixer to
> be unmuted and at reasonable volume, but it's not it. I can't rip
> the CD's neither. Any ideas what might be wrong?

This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your 
soundcard is missing or loose. I'd check this first. If this is a 
laptop, it might well be that the connection between the two 
subsystems was left out intentionally by the manufacturer to save a 
couple of cents. Some do that. :-(

Uwe

-- 
Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed!
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Wednesday 06/25/2008 Uwe Thiem(uwix@iway.na) wrote
 > On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Yoav Luft wrote:
 > > Hi,
 > > I posted a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago and got no
 > > response. I wish not to spam the mailing list, only for maybe a
 > > better luck this time. My CD ROM drive had stopped playing audio
 > > CD's. It still works fine, data CD's work alright and various
 > > programs manage to gather useful information about the audio CD's
 > > tracks, but I hear nothing. I checked all controls in alsamixer to
 > > be unmuted and at reasonable volume, but it's not it. I can't rip
 > > the CD's neither. Any ideas what might be wrong?
 > 
 > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your 
 > soundcard is missing or loose. I'd check this first. If this is a 
 > laptop, it might well be that the connection between the two 
 > subsystems was left out intentionally by the manufacturer to save a 
 > couple of cents. Some do that. :-(
 > 

I am having the same problem -- but additionally my CDROM  has no
place to even put such a cable -- at least according to the person who
actually put the machine together.
I have not opened up the box to check, but if so, what can I do to
play cds?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[W.Kenworthy]

Some (and only some) multimedia audio broke in the last few of updates
on two of my systems with cmi chipsets - I had to select IEC958 Monitor
before I got sound back. Might be the same thing.  and no, I am not
using digital output.

If this doesnt help you, might help someone else as it was a pita to
find the cause as I am not using the digital outputs from the card.

BillK


On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 23:21 +0300, Yoav Luft wrote:
> Hi,
> I posted a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago and got no response. I
> wish not to spam the mailing list, only for maybe a better luck this
> time.
> My CD ROM drive had stopped playing audio CD's. It still works fine,
> data CD's work alright and various programs manage to gather useful
> information about the audio CD's tracks, but I hear nothing. I checked
> all controls in alsamixer to be unmuted and at reasonable volume, but
> it's not it. I can't rip the CD's neither. Any ideas what might be
> wrong?
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Shields]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 834 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 4:21 PM, Yoav Luft <yoav.luft@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> I posted a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago and got no response. I wish
> not to spam the mailing list, only for maybe a better luck this time.
> My CD ROM drive had stopped playing audio CD's. It still works fine, data
> CD's work alright and various programs manage to gather useful information
> about the audio CD's tracks, but I hear nothing. I checked all controls in
> alsamixer to be unmuted and at reasonable volume, but it's not it. I can't
> rip the CD's neither. Any ideas what might be wrong?
>

This may not help, but I haven't used the analog or digital cable from the
cdrom to the soundcard to play audio cds in over 5 years; every software
player I've ever used just read the audio data directly from the cdrom.

-- 
- Mark Shields

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1107 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 25 Jun 2008, at 22:01, Uwe Thiem wrote:
> ...
> This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your
> soundcard is missing or loose.

As it bloody well should be. An analogue cable is not fixing the  
problem. It has for years been possible to play music from a CD-ROM  
connected by only the EIDE cable.

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 661 bytes --]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:53:24 +0100, Stroller wrote:

> As it bloody well should be. An analogue cable is not fixing the  
> problem. It has for years been possible to play music from a CD-ROM  
> connected by only the EIDE cable.

Although some CD player software needs to be explicitly told to use this
method. But this isn't the problem anyway,because the OP also stated that
he cannot rip audio CDs, so it is a problem with reading the CDDA data
from the drive, not playing it.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Some people are born mediocre, some people achieve mediocrity, and some
people have mediocrity thrust upon them.  - Joseph Heller, "Catch-22"

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:

>  > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your 
>  > soundcard is missing or loose. I'd check this first. If this is a 
>  > laptop, it might well be that the connection between the two 
>  > subsystems was left out intentionally by the manufacturer to save a 
>  > couple of cents. Some do that. :-(
>  > 
>
> I am having the same problem -- but additionally my CDROM  has no
> place to even put such a cable -- at least according to the person who
> actually put the machine together.
> I have not opened up the box to check, but if so, what can I do to
> play cds?

It is most inlikely that thius is related to this cable....

I recommend you to get a recent cdrtools (e.g. from 
ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/)

and install cdda2wav suid root.

Then call:

cdda2wav -e -N -B 

If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the problem.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"W.Kenworthy" <billk@iinet.net.au> wrote:

> Some (and only some) multimedia audio broke in the last few of updates
> on two of my systems with cmi chipsets - I had to select IEC958 Monitor
> before I got sound back. Might be the same thing.  and no, I am not
> using digital output.
>
> If this doesnt help you, might help someone else as it was a pita to
> find the cause as I am not using the digital outputs from the card.

The OP claimed that he cannot even extract audio from his drive...

This does not make it very probable that the problem is in the audio driver.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Thursday 06/26/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) wrote
 > John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
 > 
 > >  > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your 
 > >  > soundcard is missing or loose. I'd check this first. If this is a 
 > >  > laptop, it might well be that the connection between the two 
 > >  > subsystems was left out intentionally by the manufacturer to save a 
 > >  > couple of cents. Some do that. :-(
 > >  > 
 > >
 > > I am having the same problem -- but additionally my CDROM  has no
 > > place to even put such a cable -- at least according to the person who
 > > actually put the machine together.
 > > I have not opened up the box to check, but if so, what can I do to
 > > play cds?
 > 
 > It is most inlikely that thius is related to this cable....
 > 
 > I recommend you to get a recent cdrtools (e.g. from 
 > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/)
 > 
 > and install cdda2wav suid root.
 > 
 > Then call:
 > 
 > cdda2wav -e -N -B 
 > 
 > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
 > Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the problem.
 > 
 > Jörg

OK, we are now getting somewhere, I did hear sound out of that, now
that is interesting, but how does this work -- does it not copy the
file or is it playing from the drive?  I have cdcd and it thinks its
playing, bu I hear nothing.  Also, I can't get mplayer to do anyting,
it thinks the url is wrong or something, so this is more complicated.

Thanks much.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:

>  > I recommend you to get a recent cdrtools (e.g. from 
>  > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/)
>  > 
>  > and install cdda2wav suid root.
>  > 
>  > Then call:
>  > 
>  > cdda2wav -e -N -B 
>  > 
>  > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
>  > Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the problem.
>  > 
>  > Jörg
>
> OK, we are now getting somewhere, I did hear sound out of that, now
> that is interesting, but how does this work -- does it not copy the
> file or is it playing from the drive?  I have cdcd and it thinks its
> playing, bu I hear nothing.  Also, I can't get mplayer to do anyting,
> it thinks the url is wrong or something, so this is more complicated.

cdda2wav does things as they should be done ;-)

There are many possible reasons for your problems.
A big problem is that on Linux _some_ SCSI commands may be send to drives
without haveing root privileges and developers created GUI tools that
did things that will not work on other platforms and that will not even
work for all drives on Linux.

If the applications that does not work does not tell you why, you are lost.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Thursday 06/26/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) wrote
 > John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
 > 
 > >  > I recommend you to get a recent cdrtools (e.g. from 
 > >  > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/)
 > >  > 
 > >  > and install cdda2wav suid root.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Then call:
 > >  > 
 > >  > cdda2wav -e -N -B 
 > >  > 
 > >  > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
 > >  > Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the problem.
 > >  > 
 > >  > Jörg
 > >
 > > OK, we are now getting somewhere, I did hear sound out of that, now
 > > that is interesting, but how does this work -- does it not copy the
 > > file or is it playing from the drive?  I have cdcd and it thinks its
 > > playing, bu I hear nothing.  Also, I can't get mplayer to do anyting,
 > > it thinks the url is wrong or something, so this is more complicated.
 > 
 > cdda2wav does things as they should be done ;-)
 > 
 > There are many possible reasons for your problems.
 > A big problem is that on Linux _some_ SCSI commands may be send to drives
 > without haveing root privileges and developers created GUI tools that
 > did things that will not work on other platforms and that will not even
 > work for all drives on Linux.
 > 
 > If the applications that does not work does not tell you why, you are lost.
 > 

Well, cdcd is what I would like to use, it thinks it is playing, and
did work when I had a driv with that cable, but I hear no sound now.
I think it is reading the data off of the cd and I guess its not doing
the correct thing with it.  

Can you recomend a console player with some features like rewind, fast
forward, pause and title lookup, etc -- I don't mind changing if I
need to change.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Kirkwood]

John covici wrote:
>
> Can you recomend a console player with some features like rewind, fast
> forward, pause and title lookup, etc -- I don't mind changing if I
> need to change.
>
>   
Not a console player, but totem plays cds and movies with minimum of 
fuss, and if you have the complete Gnome install then it is "just there".

Cheers

Mark


-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:

>
> Well, cdcd is what I would like to use, it thinks it is playing, and
> did work when I had a driv with that cable, but I hear no sound now.
> I think it is reading the data off of the cd and I guess its not doing
> the correct thing with it.  
>
> Can you recomend a console player with some features like rewind, fast
> forward, pause and title lookup, etc -- I don't mind changing if I
> need to change.

Sun lawyewrs found a legal problem with libcdio. I am just working on a legal
replacement for "libcdio" together with some GOME developers from Sun. This 
will be based on a wrapper around cdda2wav.

If your problem is reading from CD, this will fix the problems but it will
take ~ 1-2 weeks to finish.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Kirkwood]

I wrote:
> Not a console player, but totem plays cds and movies with minimum of 
> fuss, and if you have the complete Gnome install then it is "just there".
>
>


Actually, I am completely mistaken...it's sound-juicer that is playing 
the cd I'm listening to right now (I usually listen to streaming mp3s 
that *are* played by totem)... sorry for the confusion!

best wishes

Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

> I wrote:
> > Not a console player, but totem plays cds and movies with minimum of 
> > fuss, and if you have the complete Gnome install then it is "just there".
> >
> >
>
>
> Actually, I am completely mistaken...it's sound-juicer that is playing 
> the cd I'm listening to right now (I usually listen to streaming mp3s 
> that *are* played by totem)... sorry for the confusion!

sound-juicer has several problems:

-	it depends on gstreamer/libcdio which is not a logal code combination.

-	It uses libmusicbrainz to extract the TOC and gets wrong TOC 
	information for CD-extra, then tries to "play" data tracks.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Thursday 06/26/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) wrote
 > Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
 > 
 > > I wrote:
 > > > Not a console player, but totem plays cds and movies with minimum of 
 > > > fuss, and if you have the complete Gnome install then it is "just there".
 > > >
 > > >
 > >
 > >
 > > Actually, I am completely mistaken...it's sound-juicer that is playing 
 > > the cd I'm listening to right now (I usually listen to streaming mp3s 
 > > that *are* played by totem)... sorry for the confusion!
 > 
 > sound-juicer has several problems:
 > 
 > -	it depends on gstreamer/libcdio which is not a logal code combination.
 > 
 > -	It uses libmusicbrainz to extract the TOC and gets wrong TOC 
 > 	information for CD-extra, then tries to "play" data tracks.

And it wants a non-existent library libesdat.so.0 -- I await the
player you are working on, but a text console version would be very
convenient.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Uwe Thiem wrote:

> This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your
> soundcard is missing or loose.

you don't need that cable. Really. You don't.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:

> And it wants a non-existent library libesdat.so.0 -- I await the
> player you are working on, but a text console version would be very
> convenient.

cdda2wav has an interactive mode since yesterday.

Check 2.01.01a42

call:

cdda2wav -e -N -B

to play all tracks non-interactive or call

cdda2wav -e -N -interactive

if you then enter e.g. "read tracks 3" it will play from track 3.
You may enter any new command while it is playing.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 419 bytes --]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:06:18 -0400, John covici wrote:

> Well, cdcd is what I would like to use, it thinks it is playing, and
> did work when I had a driv with that cable, but I hear no sound now.
> I think it is reading the data off of the cd and I guess its not doing
> the correct thing with it. 

Does it work if you run it as root?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Walk softly and carry a fully charged phazer.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Uwe Thiem]

On Thursday 26 June 2008, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Uwe Thiem wrote:
> > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your
> > soundcard is missing or loose.
>
> you don't need that cable. Really. You don't.

Sure. Some software can rip tracks off the CD in the background and 
feed the sound subsystem with them. But it uses a lot of CPU. I 
rather have the cable. ;-)

Uwe

-- 
Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed!
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Uwe Thiem <uwix@iway.na> wrote:

> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Uwe Thiem wrote:
> > > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your
> > > soundcard is missing or loose.
> >
> > you don't need that cable. Really. You don't.
>
> Sure. Some software can rip tracks off the CD in the background and 
> feed the sound subsystem with them. But it uses a lot of CPU. I 

Not true. The CPU time for ripping and playing can be neglected if done 
correctly.



Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Kirkwood]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> sound-juicer has several problems:
>
> -	it depends on gstreamer/libcdio which is not a logal code combination.
>
> -	It uses libmusicbrainz to extract the TOC and gets wrong TOC 
> 	information for CD-extra, then tries to "play" data tracks.
>
>
>
>   

No doubt true (as you clearly know about this stuff), however:

- Irrelevant to me as it plays the cds as required (thats *all* it need 
to do).
- An enhanced cd with data tracks etc is not actually a cd according the 
Phillip spec...

While it may be that your player will be superior when it comes out, I'm 
happy listening to music now...

Best wishes

Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >
> > sound-juicer has several problems:
> >
> > -	it depends on gstreamer/libcdio which is not a logal code combination.
> >
> > -	It uses libmusicbrainz to extract the TOC and gets wrong TOC 
> > 	information for CD-extra, then tries to "play" data tracks.

> No doubt true (as you clearly know about this stuff), however:
>
> - Irrelevant to me as it plays the cds as required (thats *all* it need 
> to do).
> - An enhanced cd with data tracks etc is not actually a cd according the 
> Phillip spec...

Well, it is on the Philips specs and is called CD+ or CDextra.

A more general problem is the license incompatibility with libcdio. Sun dropped
libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected the problem and I expect 
that Linux distros will do the same soon.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Kirkwood]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>   
>> - An enhanced cd with data tracks etc is not actually a cd according the 
>> Phillip spec...
>>     
>
> Well, it is on the Philips specs and is called CD+ or CDextra.
>
>   


Thanks Joerg - you are correct, I was not aware of the addition to the 
spec that allowed this (Blue Book vs Red Book spec I think?). Also I 
suspect I'd confused this with the copy protection additions and other 
stuff that really does break (either) spec...

Cheers

Mark
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >> - An enhanced cd with data tracks etc is not actually a cd according the 
> >> Phillip spec...
> >>     
> >
> > Well, it is on the Philips specs and is called CD+ or CDextra.
> >
> >   
>
>
> Thanks Joerg - you are correct, I was not aware of the addition to the 
> spec that allowed this (Blue Book vs Red Book spec I think?). Also I 

Well, this is something that has beeen added around 1992.

Some  years ago, the Music Mafia did start to sell defective disks that look 
similar to CDs, but this is a different story.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 26 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> A more general problem is the license incompatibility with libcdio.
> Sun dropped libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected the
> problem and I expect that Linux distros will do the same soon.

Could you elaborate a little on what the license incompatibility is?

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Yoav Luft]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2308 bytes --]

OK, it works!
this what I did:
yoav@yoavhost ~/music $ cdda2wav -e -N -B
cdda2wav: No such file or directory. Cannot open '-1'. Cannot open SCSI
driver.
cdda2wav: For possible targets try 'wodim -scanbus'. Make sure you are root.
Use the script scan_scsi.linux to find out more.
Probably you did not define your SCSI device.
Set the CDDA_DEVICE environment variable or use the -D option.
You can also define the default device in the Makefile.
For possible transport specifiers try 'wodim dev=help'.
Then I tried:
yoav@yoavhost ~/music $ cdda2wav -e -N -B -D /dev/cdrom
with much success. So I guess various programs probably try to play the
wrong device. How do I point them to the correct one?

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:46 PM, Joerg Schilling <
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
>
> >  > This looks like the two-wire cable between the CD ROM and your
> >  > soundcard is missing or loose. I'd check this first. If this is a
> >  > laptop, it might well be that the connection between the two
> >  > subsystems was left out intentionally by the manufacturer to save a
> >  > couple of cents. Some do that. :-(
> >  >
> >
> > I am having the same problem -- but additionally my CDROM  has no
> > place to even put such a cable -- at least according to the person who
> > actually put the machine together.
> > I have not opened up the box to check, but if so, what can I do to
> > play cds?
>
> It is most inlikely that thius is related to this cable....
>
> I recommend you to get a recent cdrtools (e.g. from
> ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/)
>
> and install cdda2wav suid root.
>
> Then call:
>
> cdda2wav -e -N -B
>
> If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
> Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the
> problem.
>
> Jörg
>
> --
>  EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de<EMail%3Ajoerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de>(home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
>       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)
>       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog:
> http://schily.blogspot.com/
>  URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/
> ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
> --
> gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4332 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > A more general problem is the license incompatibility with libcdio.
> > Sun dropped libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected the
> > problem and I expect that Linux distros will do the same soon.
>
> Could you elaborate a little on what the license incompatibility is?

First, libcdio had an illegal license change: the "authors" took a lot of the
code from cdrtools and claim that "their" code (e.g. derived from cdda2wav) is 
GPLv2-or-any-later. Well, not a single file from cdda2wav has ever been released
under this license.

If we ignore this, we come to the problem identified by the Sun lawyers:

If you run sound-juicer, then gstreamer (being LGPL) loads and calls libcdio 
which is GPL. This is not allowed by the GPL. GPL and LGPL are incompatible.


While the GPL is asymmetric and allows GPL code to call code under any license,
GPLd code is not allowed to be called from non-GPL code.


The LGPL has a "cure" for this problem but if you try to use it, you even come 
into more problems:

The LGPL allows you to change your local copy of code from LGPL to GPL, but this
change is irreversible and valid to your local copy and all copies taken from 
this code. If you did do the change, you would end up in a bunch of GPL 
libraries that cannot be used anymore by non-GPL code, making your distro 
unusable.




Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"Yoav Luft" <yoav.luft@gmail.com> wrote:

> OK, it works!
> this what I did:
> yoav@yoavhost ~/music $ cdda2wav -e -N -B
> cdda2wav: No such file or directory. Cannot open '-1'. Cannot open SCSI
> driver.
> cdda2wav: For possible targets try 'wodim -scanbus'. Make sure you are root.
> Use the script scan_scsi.linux to find out more.

This is not cdda2wav, but a defective and very putdated fork - don't use it.

The real cdda2wav does not need the device parameter if yo only have one CD-ROM
in your system.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 27 Jun 2008, at 10:25, Joerg Schilling wrote:

> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> A more general problem is the license incompatibility with libcdio.
>>> Sun dropped libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected  
>>> the
>>> problem and I expect that Linux distros will do the same soon.
>>
>> Could you elaborate a little on what the license incompatibility is?
>
> First, libcdio had an illegal license change...

Since you now appear to be answering license questions, could I  
trouble you, please, to address this query?

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/200045

Thanks in advance,

Stroller.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 27 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> If we ignore this, we come to the problem identified by the Sun
> lawyers:
>
> If you run sound-juicer, then gstreamer (being LGPL) loads and calls
> libcdio which is GPL. This is not allowed by the GPL. GPL and LGPL
> are incompatible.

Thanks for the explanation

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:

>
> On 27 Jun 2008, at 10:25, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> >>> A more general problem is the license incompatibility with libcdio.
> >>> Sun dropped libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected  
> >>> the
> >>> problem and I expect that Linux distros will do the same soon.
> >>
> >> Could you elaborate a little on what the license incompatibility is?
> >
> > First, libcdio had an illegal license change...
>
> Since you now appear to be answering license questions, could I  
> trouble you, please, to address this query?
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/200045

If you like to have a serious answer, do not include pointers to nonserious
articles like this one:

http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 27 Jun 2008, at 10:57, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 27 Jun 2008, at 10:25, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>>>>> A more general problem is the license incompatibility with  
>>>>> libcdio.
>>>>> Sun dropped libcdio already a year ago after Sun lawyers detected
>>>>> the
>>>>> problem and I expect that Linux distros will do the same soon.
>>>>
>>>> Could you elaborate a little on what the license incompatibility  
>>>> is?
>>>
>>> First, libcdio had an illegal license change...
>>
>> Since you now appear to be answering license questions, could I
>> trouble you, please, to address this query?
>>
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/200045
>
> If you like to have a serious answer, do not include pointers to  
> nonserious
> articles like this one:
>
> http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/

Sorry, Joerg.

I only included that article because it came up when I searched for  
"cdrecord" license problem.

Perhaps you could overlook my ignorance just this once and explain  
why you chose to migrate your software from the GPL to the CDDL
(or to a CDDL-alike license).

To a naive reader, with only that article to go on, it does seem to  
be that action of yours which instigated distros dropping your  
software for the alternative. I'm sure, as you say, this was  
unjustified on their part, however some background on your choice  
might be helpful.

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:57:43 +0200
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:

> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Since you now appear to be answering license questions, could I  
> > trouble you, please, to address this query?
> >
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/200045
> 
> If you like to have a serious answer, do not include pointers to
> nonserious articles like this one:
> 
> http://lwn.net/Articles/195167/
> 
> Jörg
> 


Jörg,

The question is valid and interesting, moreover it is asked very kindly.
I can't see what possibly might be preventing you to answer the same
way.

Let me rephrase the original question w/o pointers to any external
sources to avoid unintentional offending you:

Why do you use a modified CDDL license? What are the advantages of
this license over GPL?

Please, be assured that there is no single piece of sarcasm in those
questions and my intention is not to blame you for anything. Those
are a real questions, expressing sincere curiosity.

I'm looking forward to reading your response.


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:

> The question is valid and interesting, moreover it is asked very kindly.
> I can't see what possibly might be preventing you to answer the same
> way.

I did answer these questions many times before and in many cases I have 
later been attacked. 

The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that should be 
easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are published without 
comment, I asume that the questionair believes the incorrect claims from 
lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make untrue claims (e.g. by giving
uncommented pointers to other peoples incorrect articles) before asking?


> Let me rephrase the original question w/o pointers to any external
> sources to avoid unintentional offending you:
>
> Why do you use a modified CDDL license? What are the advantages of
> this license over GPL?

What do you call "a modified CDDL license" and why do you believe there is
"a modified CDDL license"?

Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some people 
(those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack the cdrtools 
project?

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that should be 
> easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are published without 
> comment, I asume that the questionair believes the incorrect claims from 
> lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make untrue claims (e.g. by giving
> uncommented pointers to other peoples incorrect articles) before asking?

Absolutely yes, I'd answer them even *more eagerly* than to others.
What's the point in telling things to people that already know/agree 
with those things?

The best way to get people on understanding your point of view is to 
honestly explaining facts, instead of seeing menaces, FUD and snakeoil 
everywhere. There is no conspiracy against you, Joerg.

> Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some people 
> (those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack the cdrtools 
> project?

*Before* or *after* changing license?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:20:50 +0200
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:

> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > The question is valid and interesting, moreover it is asked very
> > kindly. I can't see what possibly might be preventing you to answer
> > the same way.
> 
> I did answer these questions many times before and in many cases I
> have later been attacked. 
> 
> The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that
> should be easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are
> published without comment, I asume that the questionair believes the
> incorrect claims from lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make
> untrue claims (e.g. by giving uncommented pointers to other peoples
> incorrect articles) before asking?
> 

No, this is your assumption. Mine is the opposite - as I see it, the
question is very real and the author admitted that he found those URLs
using Google which implies he had nothing to do them.

...And yes, I second to b.n. - I'd be explaining my position and I'd be
answering every single question if I wanted the people to take my side.
Even if the question is asked on purpose, it is better to answer with
reason instead of flaming. 


> > Why do you use a modified CDDL license? What are the advantages of
> > this license over GPL?
> 
> What do you call "a modified CDDL license" and why do you believe
> there is "a modified CDDL license"?


Answering the question with question? (obviously I can do that too :D)

Seriously, "eix -v cdrtools" gives "GPL-2 LGPL-2.1 CDDL-Schily". I
assumed you want the package released under your own licence based on
the Sun's CDDL.


> Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some
> people (those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack
> the cdrtools project?


No, I've never heard about the problem before I saw your posts to this
list several months ago, but I really care to see your side of the
story.

First it would be interesting, second more effective for your cause and
third it would hopefully cease your current practice to hijack every
optical media related thread on this list and send spam that advertises
your product (cdrtools).

I mean no offense, but allow me to be blunt. This practice of yours
is not only extremely annoying, but it is also very unwise because it
backfires - instead of making people understand your problem, now you
have a list of annoyed Gentoo fans.

The history. Well, I did some searching myself and here's the picture I
see from what I managed to find in The Internet.

You want to use the CDDL. On the other hand you can't release the whole
project under CDDL, because there are parts written by other people who
had released their work under GPL before you took the project. So, you
dual-licensed the package, releasing the parts you have written by
yourself as CDDL and the others w/o changing the license.

(How am I doing so far?)


Some Debian maintainers saw a problem because CDDL is not compatible
with GNU GPL and they made the fork "cdrkit". As I understand it the
legal problem is when it comes to the binaries produced from your
sources because their distribution will violate the GNU GPL.

That's why most of the binary distros dropped your packet. On the other
hand Gentoo and the other source based distros don't have the same
problem, because they don't distribute binaries.

All of this made you like Gentoo and hate Debian and especially the
those behind the fork.


Now, if you have the good will, please, do correct me and tell us your
version of the story.



-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> > The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that should be 
> > easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are published without 
> > comment, I asume that the questionair believes the incorrect claims from 
> > lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make untrue claims (e.g. by giving
> > uncommented pointers to other peoples incorrect articles) before asking?
>
> Absolutely yes, I'd answer them even *more eagerly* than to others.
> What's the point in telling things to people that already know/agree 
> with those things?

This is what I am doing during the last 4 years when some people started the 
diffamation campaign against cdrtools.

As a result, I have been told by many people that they don't like to read more 
on this topic.


> > Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some people 
> > (those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack the cdrtools 
> > project?
>
> *Before* or *after* changing license?

The diffamation campaign started long before I changed the license.

The attacks started with repeated personal insults done by Eduard Bloch after
he asked me to include a UTF-8 related patch from Debian to mkisofs. I checked
the patch and explained him that the patch was buggy and not working. I send 
him the error message from the Sun Studio Compiler (gcc did not complain about 
the bugs) and at that time, the attacks from  Eduard Bloch started.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 28 Jun 2008, at 02:41, Daniel Iliev wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 00:20:50 +0200
> Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:
>
>> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The question is valid and interesting, moreover it is asked very
>>> kindly. I can't see what possibly might be preventing you to answer
>>> the same way.
>>
>> I did answer these questions many times before and in many cases I
>> have later been attacked.

Joerg, then perhaps it would be easy for you to provide a link to  
those answers? If I were answering the same question many times, then  
I'd probably set up an FAQ page on my website.

>> The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that
>> should be easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are
>> published without comment, I asume that the questionair believes the
>> incorrect claims from lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make
>> untrue claims (e.g. by giving uncommented pointers to other peoples
>> incorrect articles) before asking?
>>
>
> No, this is your assumption. Mine is the opposite - as I see it, the
> question is very real and the author admitted that he found those URLs
> using Google which implies he had nothing to do them.

Yes, exactly. I Googled to try & find out Joerg's side of the story &  
it simply wasn't immediately obvious (why he chose to change to the  
CDDL).

There was no malice in my question - from the sounds of it, Joerg's  
software is better than the fork. If it doesn't affect me then I  
won't bother one way or the other, but if one license is clearly  
better than the other (or if Joerg is genuinely the victim of  
malicious or jealous wossisname) then I'll be really militant about  
switching all my machines. I use Free software because my right to  
continue using it is protected.

> I mean no offense, but allow me to be blunt. This practice of yours
> is not only extremely annoying, but it is also very unwise because it
> backfires - instead of making people understand your problem, now you
> have a list of annoyed Gentoo fans.

Exactly. For periods I don't follow the list at all, but I have  
encountered Joerg's posts before and this latest thread just started  
to piss me off. Honestly, Joerg, the tone of your messages just makes  
me feel you're irrational.

If I felt he was righteous & justified in his indignation then I'd  
climb on his team. Until this morning's exchange of posts I just felt  
he was avoiding my question because he couldn't fairly argue his  
position.

> You want to use the CDDL. On the other hand you can't release the  
> whole
> project under CDDL, because there are parts written by other people  
> who
> had released their work under GPL before you took the project. So, you
> dual-licensed the package, releasing the parts you have written by
> yourself as CDDL and the others w/o changing the license.

That's fair enough.

Why do you prefer the CDDL to the GPL, Joerg?

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The URLs mentioned did point to disinformation from lwn.net that
> > should be easily identifyable as incorrect claims. If such URLs are
> > published without comment, I asume that the questionair believes the
> > incorrect claims from lwn.net. Would you answer people if they make
> > untrue claims (e.g. by giving uncommented pointers to other peoples
> > incorrect articles) before asking?
> > 
>
> No, this is your assumption. Mine is the opposite - as I see it, the
> question is very real and the author admitted that he found those URLs
> using Google which implies he had nothing to do them.

Could you explain me why he did not read the information on the cdrtools
web page to get the information?

> > What do you call "a modified CDDL license" and why do you believe
> > there is "a modified CDDL license"?
>
>
> Answering the question with question? (obviously I can do that too :D)

It makes no sense to answer questions if the question contains a hint for a 
missunderstanding.

> Seriously, "eix -v cdrtools" gives "GPL-2 LGPL-2.1 CDDL-Schily". I
> assumed you want the package released under your own licence based on
> the Sun's CDDL.

If you read the CDDL, you should understand the background. Meanwhile it makes
sense to tell the person who is responsible for the missleadingly shortened
information to correct it.

BTW: If you like to understand it completely compare the 1st CDDL proposal with 
the final text. I am responsible for the changes and these changes allow authors
like me to use the CDDL. Before it was only usable in the USA and only by Sun.

> > Do you know the history? Do you know that since summer 2004, some
> > people (those people who now stand behind "wodim") started to attack
> > the cdrtools project?
>
>
> No, I've never heard about the problem before I saw your posts to this
> list several months ago, but I really care to see your side of the
> story.

Why don't you then frist read the information on the cdrtools web page?


> First it would be interesting, second more effective for your cause and
> third it would hopefully cease your current practice to hijack every
> optical media related thread on this list and send spam that advertises
> your product (cdrtools).

If you believe this, then we need to stop this thread immediately.

Every such thread on this list that was based on Bugs introduced by the people 
who "created" wodim.

  
> I mean no offense, but allow me to be blunt. This practice of yours
> is not only extremely annoying, but it is also very unwise because it
> backfires - instead of making people understand your problem, now you
> have a list of annoyed Gentoo fans.

Do you like to tell me that Gentoo users are not interested to know why they
have problems with CD/DVD writing?
Do you like to tell me that nobody is interested in a simple fix?


> You want to use the CDDL. On the other hand you can't release the whole
> project under CDDL, because there are parts written by other people who
> had released their work under GPL before you took the project. So, you
> dual-licensed the package, releasing the parts you have written by
> yourself as CDDL and the others w/o changing the license.
>
> (How am I doing so far?)

It seems that you never tried to read the information on the cdrtools
web page.


> Some Debian maintainers saw a problem because CDDL is not compatible
> with GNU GPL and they made the fork "cdrkit". As I understand it the
> legal problem is when it comes to the binaries produced from your
> sources because their distribution will violate the GNU GPL.
>
> That's why most of the binary distros dropped your packet. On the other
> hand Gentoo and the other source based distros don't have the same
> problem, because they don't distribute binaries.

This is the lies spread by the people around Eduard Bloch.

The truth is that if these people _really_ believe their claim, they would 
need to take cdrkit offline immediately because it includes even more of the
same "violations" claimed by Bloch & Co against the original project.

Let me give you a simple example: they claim that a GPLd source may only be 
compiled using GPLd build system and that the build system needs to be part of 
the source. Well, the second claim is correct, but they do not include the build
system used for cdrkit in the cdrkit source.

They even replaced the original build system by just another build system that 
is not under GPL too.

The people around Bloch are contradicting themselves and nobody seems to care 
about the truth.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:


Why do you continue to attack me?

Do you really believe that this helps?

Why didn't you use Google to find and read my FAQ for the topic on the cdrtools
web page?

The CD/DVD related questions on this list that I answer are all based on bugs
introduced by the wodim people into wodim.

Even though all these bugs are not from me, more than 90% if the cdrkit
package is still written by Heiko and me. It is my task to inform people
on the reason of the bugs as the initators of the bugs prefer to keep quiet and 
to let the bugs stay unfixed.

If you don't want me to inform people on why they have problems, there is a 
simple way to achive this:

Make the official cdrtools the default and all known problems will go away.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>> No, this is your assumption. Mine is the opposite - as I see it, the
>> question is very real and the author admitted that he found those URLs
>> using Google which implies he had nothing to do them.
> 
> Could you explain me why he did not read the information on the cdrtools
> web page to get the information?

Read it (admittedly, read mostly the google cache because berlios.de 
seems slow/unreachable now).

It just says "I choose CDDL because it's more free than GPL" and stuff 
like that. This is better than the complete nothing we had before, but 
it is still quite obscure.

I gave a (quick) look at the CDDL and on one side I feel sympathetic 
with you (it seems the incompatibility claimed by Debian is extremly 
technical and doesn't seem to pose peculiar problems) but on the other 
side it seems CDDL and GPL are similar enough that I see no strong 
reason to change license.

- Why is it in your opinion more free, in a few words?
- Why did you prefer to release it CDDL and see people go berserk (right 
or wrong they are, it doesn't count here) instead of keeping it GPL and 
let everyone live peacefully? In other words: why is CDDL *so important* 
to you that you prefer to see bad forks of your software pop out instead 
of having a compromise about licenses and let your software live happily?


>>> What do you call "a modified CDDL license" and why do you believe
>>> there is "a modified CDDL license"?
>>
>> Answering the question with question? (obviously I can do that too :D)
> 
> It makes no sense to answer questions if the question contains a hint for a 
> missunderstanding.

Again, you don't understand the purpose of *human communication*. 
Communication is exactly made to iron out misunderstandings. 
Communicating with people that are already on your side/already 
understand what you're going to say *makes no sense*.

>> First it would be interesting, second more effective for your cause and
>> third it would hopefully cease your current practice to hijack every
>> optical media related thread on this list and send spam that advertises
>> your product (cdrtools).
> 
> If you believe this, then we need to stop this thread immediately.
> 
> Every such thread on this list that was based on Bugs introduced by the people 
> who "created" wodim.
>   
>> I mean no offense, but allow me to be blunt. This practice of yours
>> is not only extremely annoying, but it is also very unwise because it
>> backfires - instead of making people understand your problem, now you
>> have a list of annoyed Gentoo fans.
> 
> Do you like to tell me that Gentoo users are not interested to know why they
> have problems with CD/DVD writing?
> Do you like to tell me that nobody is interested in a simple fix?

Surely to let people aware of the cdrkit/cdrtools split and that 
cdrtools can fix what's made by cdrkit is useful.
But it seems there is a tendency to make things degenerate into a 
constant "either with me or against me!" threading, and your "conspiracy 
theory" attitude does not help.


You tell on the webpage that Debian people started attack you before the 
licence change. No link, for what I can see at a glance, is provided to 
examples of these attacks (if I'm wrong, please correct me).
No reason is given for those attacks (again, if I'm wrong,etc.).

Now, it is possible that Debian has been possessed by $EVIL_DEITY and 
that all those people are dedicating their life to annoy poor old Joerg.

Bear with me however if I assign to that quite tiny odds.

What I think is that those people were honestly concerned for some 
(maybe stupid, maybe real) reason. Why should one randomly begin to 
attack randomly a good developer releasing essential software? Why 
should one go so long to fork such hard software, if this one does not 
sincerely believe there is a reason to embark on such an adventure? You 
may disagree with them, but thinking that they're doing all that just 
because of a personaly conspiracy against you and cdrtools seems a bit a 
delusion.

Here's what I'd write on your webpage if I was you:

"Q: Why is there a fork of cdrtools?
A: In 2004, a discussion arose with Debian developers around $ISSUE 
(see *here*) and, later, around licensing terms (see *here*). Basically 
there is a disagreement between us on the possibility to relicense [...] 
Unfortunately, despite long and bitter discussion, no compromise had 
been reached and they decided to release a supposedly "more free" fork, 
called cdrkit. I personally disagree completely (CDDL is in my opinion 
more free than GPL), but that's their choice.

Q: Is there a reason to use cdrtools instead of forks?
A: Yes. cdrkit is less updated (see cdrkit activity *here* vs cdrtools 
activity *here*) and more buggy (see *here* for a comparison of cdrkit 
bugs vs cdrtools bugs). So, I strongly advice to use the original 
cdrtools instead of the forks. Unfortunately, many Linux distribution 
choose to follow Debian reasoning on licences and distribute cdrkit 
instead of cdrtools. A notable exception is Gentoo."

Practically the same stuff, but no conspiracy theory wording. It would 
make you look like more of a reasonable person. What do you think?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
> Why do you continue to attack me?
> 
> Do you really believe that this helps?

Repeat with me, Joerg.
"No one is attacking me."
Take a deep breath and repeat.
"No one is attacking me."
Again and again and again.

Joerg, really. You suffer some kind of paranoid syndrome. We're just 
trying to understand. Your behaviour is sometimes, ehm, difficult to 
bear with, but we're trying to do our best to listen to your side.

No one is attacking you. Honestly, there is no reason whatsover for us 
to do that.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Hi,

Jörg, you do have a point (or two) and guys? Cut him some slack, ok? 

I had my 'clashes' with him in the past, and yes, sometimes he is tiresome to 
deal with or too tempting to provoke him, but this whole mess is really not 
his fault or only to a very small part that could easily explained with 
miscommunication. After all this years reading mails and postings he wrote I 
came to the conclusion that the biggest problem is a certain lack of people 
skills he haa. He is a great programmer but sometimes has problems to sell his 
ideas/thoughts/points.  A lot of times I thought 'gosh, he is right, but sadly 
he just said it in the worst way possible'. Jörg, I don't want to attack you, 
it is just an observation. I have the uttermost respect for your programming 
skills/talent and knowledge about SCSI and everything related.

His cdrtools is usually in top shape and while everybody is free to disagree 
with some of his choices, nobody should attack him like some in this thread. 

If he says that cdrkit&co have bugs cdrtools has not, I believe him. I don't 
even google for it. Because whatever altercations you have or want to have 
with him - he knows his software and he fixes the bugs that pop up (except in 
cases when people think there is a bug and Jörg thinks otherwise, but hey that 
is no good reason to bash him). He is doing this for a long time - some 
members of this list might not even be borne when he started writiting 
software. And how many devs are actively strolling distribution bugzillas and 
mailing lists like him, looking for problems people might have with software 
he created or maintains?

So, why not read the information on his page, google a bit, look for yourself 
- and admit, that Jörg is not the big evil just a little bit lacking on the 
'sell my points' front. Even if he likes Solaris more like Linux.

So could this fruitless near-flaming stop right here? The thread has long 
passed its use by date.

Glück Auf,
Volker
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1201 bytes --]

On Thursday 26 June 2008, John covici wrote:
> on Thursday 06/26/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de)
> wrote

>  > Then call:
>  >
>  > cdda2wav -e -N -B
>  >
>  > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
>  > Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the
>  > problem.
>  >
>  > Jörg
>
> OK, we are now getting somewhere, I did hear sound out of that, now
> that is interesting, but how does this work -- does it not copy the
> file or is it playing from the drive?  I have cdcd and it thinks its
> playing, bu I hear nothing.  Also, I can't get mplayer to do anyting,
> it thinks the url is wrong or something, so this is more complicated.
>
> Thanks much.

When I run cdda2wav -e -N -B I get:
===================================
recording 3884.2933 seconds stereo with 16 bits @ 44100.0 Hz
percent_done:
100%  track  1 recorded successfully
===================================

The "recording" part confuses me.  Does this mean that the command actually 
writes a file on my hard drive or just plays it by passing it on to /dev/dsp?  
Am I going to run out of disk space?

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Saturday 06/28/2008 Mick(michaelkintzios@gmail.com) wrote
 > On Thursday 26 June 2008, John covici wrote:
 > > on Thursday 06/26/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de)
 > > wrote
 > 
 > >  > Then call:
 > >  >
 > >  > cdda2wav -e -N -B
 > >  >
 > >  > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
 > >  > Otherwise you see human readble error messages that point you to the
 > >  > problem.
 > >  >
 > >  > Jörg
 > >
 > > OK, we are now getting somewhere, I did hear sound out of that, now
 > > that is interesting, but how does this work -- does it not copy the
 > > file or is it playing from the drive?  I have cdcd and it thinks its
 > > playing, bu I hear nothing.  Also, I can't get mplayer to do anyting,
 > > it thinks the url is wrong or something, so this is more complicated.
 > >
 > > Thanks much.
 > 
 > When I run cdda2wav -e -N -B I get:
 > ===================================
 > recording 3884.2933 seconds stereo with 16 bits @ 44100.0 Hz
 > percent_done:
 > 100%  track  1 recorded successfully
 > ===================================
 > 
 > The "recording" part confuses me.  Does this mean that the command actually 
 > writes a file on my hard drive or just plays it by passing it on to /dev/dsp?  
 > Am I going to run out of disk space?

The -N prevents writing to disk.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 28 June 2008, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Why do you continue to attack me?

Joerg,

He is not attacking you. Here's some good advice:

drop the paranoia. please.

Stroller is going out of his way and bending over backwards to invite 
you to answer some simple questions about why you chose to do a certain 
action. He is obviously genuinely interested in the answer to this 
question. He even seems predisposed to agree with you, but you need to 
give him your rationale before he will do that. Interspersing all your 
replies with references to other people attacking you, Debian 
maintainers who suck and buggy forks is not helping your cause any.

Stroller wants to hear *your* point of view. As a token of respect for 
all the users of your software (the original, not the fork) who are 
here and reading this, could you please just describe your position, 
and omit all references as to why other points of view are wrong.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 28 Jun 2008, at 12:02, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> <snipped?>
>
> Why do you continue to attack me?

You're a nutter, mate.

> Why didn't you use Google to find and read my FAQ for the topic on  
> the cdrtools
> web page?

Why didn't you just give me the URL of your FAQ?
(which I just found after reading your reply to Daniel Iliev).

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

Joerg,


I'd be glad if you (can) explain me where I'm wrong.


GPL, Section 0, Sentence 1:
======
This License applies to any program or other work which contains a
notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
under the terms of this General Public License.
======


mkisofs.c:
======
/*
 * Program mkisofs.c - generate iso9660 filesystem  based upon directory
 * tree on hard disk.
 *
 * Written by Eric Youngdale (1993).
 *
 * Copyright 1993 Yggdrasil Computing, Incorporated
 * Copyright (c) 1999,2000-2007 J. Schilling
 *
 * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation; either version 2, or (at your option)
 * any later version.
======


So, the GNU GPL applies to mkisofs.c, right?


GPL, Section 0, Sentence 2:
======
The "Program", below, refers to any such program or work, and a "work
based on the Program" means either the Program or any derivative work
under copyright law: that is to say, a work containing the Program or
a portion of it, either verbatim or with modifications and/or
translated into another language.
======

So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the
Program", right?


GPL, Section 2, b:
======
"You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part
thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties
under the terms of this License."
======

You are publishing the cdrtools package. The cdrtools package "in whole
or in part contains" mkisofs.c. So, "you must cause" the cdrtools
package "to be licensed as a whole" under the terms of the GNU GPL,
right?


It seems to me that you are obliged to publish cdrtools under the GNU
GPL until cdrtools contains at least one piece of work which is licensed
under the GNU GPL. Actually that is what the GNU GPL is all about - to
force you to keep the source of a given project open if you had used any
GPLd work for that project.

How can this be achieved? Simply the GPL applies itself to the whole
system if even the smallest part of the system was licenced under it.

Like a virus. :)



-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Read it (admittedly, read mostly the google cache because berlios.de 
> seems slow/unreachable now).

berlios.de is quick - much faster than the google cache. It may be that your 
internet provider has a bad peering with the German research network.


> It just says "I choose CDDL because it's more free than GPL" and stuff 
> like that. This is better than the complete nothing we had before, but 
> it is still quite obscure.
>
> I gave a (quick) look at the CDDL and on one side I feel sympathetic 
> with you (it seems the incompatibility claimed by Debian is extremly 
> technical and doesn't seem to pose peculiar problems) but on the other 
> side it seems CDDL and GPL are similar enough that I see no strong 
> reason to change license.

The CDDL has been designed to be compatible with all OSS licenses.
The GPL has been designed to be incompatible (*) with all other licenses 
including the LGPL. OpenSource needs collaboration. This cannot happen with
the asymmetric incompatibility the GPL tries to impose.

*) The GPL allows GPLd code to call code from any license but disallows that
GPLd code is callsed by non-GPLd code.


> - Why is it in your opinion more free, in a few words?

The GPL tries to take off freedom in otder to keep freedom. This does not work 
in most cases (I tried to sue two companies to no avail), so why take off 
freedom at all?

> - Why did you prefer to release it CDDL and see people go berserk (right 
> or wrong they are, it doesn't count here) instead of keeping it GPL and 
> let everyone live peacefully? In other words: why is CDDL *so important* 
> to you that you prefer to see bad forks of your software pop out instead 
> of having a compromise about licenses and let your software live happily?

If you did read my FAQ, you would know that this is wrong.

I did change the license _after_ Eduard Bloch and his "friends" did go berserk.


> >> Answering the question with question? (obviously I can do that too :D)
> > 
> > It makes no sense to answer questions if the question contains a hint for a 
> > missunderstanding.
>
> Again, you don't understand the purpose of *human communication*. 
> Communication is exactly made to iron out misunderstandings. 
> Communicating with people that are already on your side/already 
> understand what you're going to say *makes no sense*.

I am sorry to see that you don't understand how human communication works.
Only 20% of human communication is done by words. For this reason, 
communication that is only based on words has a big chance for 
missunderstandings. I asked back because it was obvious that you already did 
missunderstand the license "delaration" from Gentoo. cdrecord/cdda2wav/...
are under the original CDDL. There is no CDDL-Schily.



> > Do you like to tell me that Gentoo users are not interested to know why they
> > have problems with CD/DVD writing?
> > Do you like to tell me that nobody is interested in a simple fix?
>
> Surely to let people aware of the cdrkit/cdrtools split and that 
> cdrtools can fix what's made by cdrkit is useful.
> But it seems there is a tendency to make things degenerate into a 
> constant "either with me or against me!" threading, and your "conspiracy 
> theory" attitude does not help.

This is again a missunderstanding at your side.

As there is no development or bug fixing for cdrkit, it is obviously not 
possible to write something different than it still does not work.

> You tell on the webpage that Debian people started attack you before the 
> licence change. No link, for what I can see at a glance, is provided to 
> examples of these attacks (if I'm wrong, please correct me).
> No reason is given for those attacks (again, if I'm wrong,etc.).

What you read on my web page is first hand information. All other people 
spread the dissinformation from Bloch. 

If you _really_ miss information in my FAQ, you should ask...



Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> > Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Why do you continue to attack me?
> > 
> > Do you really believe that this helps?
>
> Repeat with me, Joerg.
> "No one is attacking me."

Just because you did not read it to it's end does not meanthat he did not
attack me. He write that "I am pissing him off".

I was polite in the discussion and I expect the same from others.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:33:12 +0200
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:

 
> The CDDL has been designed to be compatible with all OSS licenses.
> The GPL has been designed to be incompatible (*) with all other
> licenses including the LGPL. OpenSource needs collaboration. This
> cannot happen with the asymmetric incompatibility the GPL tries to
> impose.
> 
> *) The GPL allows GPLd code to call code from any license but
> disallows that GPLd code is callsed by non-GPLd code.
> 
> 
> > - Why is it in your opinion more free, in a few words?
> 
> The GPL tries to take off freedom in otder to keep freedom. This does
> not work in most cases (I tried to sue two companies to no avail), so
> why take off freedom at all?
>

OK, all this means that in your opinion CDDL is better than GPL, but
by no means it grants you the right to disregard GPL in favour of CDDL. 

Like it or not, there are GPL-ed pieces in cdrtools and if you want to
use those pieces you have to comply with the GPL. That's the will of
their respective authors. I don't like the EULA of Microsoft, so I
don't use their products. It's as simple as that.

As I see it there are two options to stop the pointless discussion if
CDDL and GPL can be legally mixed in cdrtools. First - revert back to
GPL, second - move everything to CDDL. I see two solutions for the
second choice:

 - remove/rewrite the GPLd parts (which would be enormous waste of
labour and/or crippling the package)

 - you could try to ask those authors to release a new version of their
work under CDDL. If they agree there will be no place for doubts - you
will be well within your rights to use CDDL.


> > - Why did you prefer to release it CDDL and see people go berserk
> > (right or wrong they are, it doesn't count here) instead of keeping
> > it GPL and let everyone live peacefully? In other words: why is
> > CDDL *so important* to you that you prefer to see bad forks of your
> > software pop out instead of having a compromise about licenses and
> > let your software live happily?
> 
> If you did read my FAQ, you would know that this is wrong.


I've read it even before this thread was started and I really don't
know. I have the FAQs from your site open right now and I still can't
understand. The only two references to CDDL I can find are:

=============
"Cdrtools are now available unter a OSS license that gives more freedom
than the GPL
On May 15th 2006, most of the code has been relicensed under the CDDL.
The CDDL has been selected as one of 8 preferred licenses by the OSI."

[ http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/cdrecord.html ]
=============

(...which is irrelevant to this discusion)


and

=============
"The attacks have been based on the fact that cdrtools was licensed
under the GPL. As a result, on May 15th 2006 most projects from the
cdrtools project bundle have been relicensed under CDDL (giving more
freedom to users than the GPL does)."

[ http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html ]
=============


Are you saying that you went to CDDL because some people attacked you
for using GPL and later the same people made a fork exactly because the
CDDL in cdrtools is not compatible with the GPL?

Then why didn't you just get back to GPL!?


> > Again, you don't understand the purpose of *human communication*. 
> > Communication is exactly made to iron out misunderstandings. 
> > Communicating with people that are already on your side/already 
> > understand what you're going to say *makes no sense*.
> 
> I am sorry to see that you don't understand how human communication
> works. Only 20% of human communication is done by words. For this
> reason, communication that is only based on words has a big chance
> for missunderstandings. I asked back because it was obvious that you
> already did missunderstand the license "delaration" from Gentoo.
> cdrecord/cdda2wav/... are under the original CDDL. There is no
> CDDL-Schily.
> 

Yes, absolutely! It is even more relevant when we write those words in a
non-native language. That is why it is even more important to answer
exactly to the same questions you were asked, instead of writing
whatever comes to your mind at the moment.

P.S.

If you cared at least a little about Gentoo, you'd go to
http://bugs.gentoo.org and write a bug report requesting a correct
declaration of the license. I'm sure your request will be fulfilled.


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>>> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Why do you continue to attack me?
>>>
>>> Do you really believe that this helps?
>> Repeat with me, Joerg.
>> "No one is attacking me."
> 
> Just because you did not read it to it's end does not meanthat he did not
> attack me. He write that "I am pissing him off".

That's no attack Joerg. That's a statement about himself, not you.
If he said something like "Joerg is a moron" that would be a personal 
attack. No one is saying that (at least, not me, nor him). He is simply 
stating, instead, that your behaviour makes him feel nervous, which is 
something different from attack.

Please, please, please: stop *always* assuming bad faith from anyone 
that is not immediately agreeing with you. We asked this before and we 
ask this again, and we will ask it until it happens. Please. That's the 
*main* block to be surpassed if we want this to be a reasonable thread

(The other is your admittedly elusive attitude to release fully details 
on what happened, both on your webpages and this thread -for example, we 
still have *no* link about the supposed attacks you received *before* 
the relicensing, despite repeated requests for that).

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mark Kirkwood]

b.n. wrote:
> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>> "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>>>> Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why do you continue to attack me?
>>>>
>>>> Do you really believe that this helps?
>>> Repeat with me, Joerg.
>>> "No one is attacking me."
>>
>> Just because you did not read it to it's end does not meanthat he did 
>> not
>> attack me. He write that "I am pissing him off".
>
> That's no attack Joerg. That's a statement about himself, not you.
> If he said something like "Joerg is a moron" that would be a personal 
> attack. No one is saying that (at least, not me, nor him). He is 
> simply stating, instead, that your behaviour makes him feel nervous, 
> which is something different from attack.
>
> Please, please, please: stop *always* assuming bad faith from anyone 
> that is not immediately agreeing with you. We asked this before and we 
> ask this again, and we will ask it until it happens. Please. That's 
> the *main* block to be surpassed if we want this to be a reasonable 
> thread
>
> (The other is your admittedly elusive attitude to release fully 
> details on what happened, both on your webpages and this thread -for 
> example, we still have *no* link about the supposed attacks you 
> received *before* the relicensing, despite repeated requests for that).
>
> m.
I think it is in here:

http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html

specifically (quote):


        In fact, this happened around y2004. I received a patch that was
        intended to add UTF-8 support to mkisofs.

        Unfortunately, the code quality of this patch was lousy. It
        tried to incorrectly initialize a structure and it handled only
        a few obvious cases. Many important issues with UTF-8 support
        have been completely ignored. As a result, I rejected this patch
        because I do care about code quality (I still need to be able to
        maintain the code in a few years). The people in the Linux
        distribution could have fixed the problems and created a useful
        solution but they did not do this.

        Now these people have been in trouble and needed an excuse for
        their behavior. They created the fairy tale that there is a
        license problem in cdrtools. They created a network of
        "cooperation" and supported some people which created a fork of
        cdrtools based on the fairy tale.....

        (end quote)

regards

Mark


-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Mark Kirkwood ha scritto:
> b.n. wrote:
>> (The other is your admittedly elusive attitude to release fully 
>> details on what happened, both on your webpages and this thread -for 
>> example, we still have *no* link about the supposed attacks you 
>> received *before* the relicensing, despite repeated requests for that).
>>
>> m.
> I think it is in here:
> 
> http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/linux-dist.html
> 
> specifically (quote):
> 
> 
>        In fact, this happened around y2004. I received a patch that was
>        intended to add UTF-8 support to mkisofs.
> 
>        Unfortunately, the code quality of this patch was lousy. It
>        tried to incorrectly initialize a structure and it handled only
>        a few obvious cases. Many important issues with UTF-8 support
>        have been completely ignored. As a result, I rejected this patch
>        because I do care about code quality (I still need to be able to
>        maintain the code in a few years). The people in the Linux
>        distribution could have fixed the problems and created a useful
>        solution but they did not do this.
> 
>        Now these people have been in trouble and needed an excuse for
>        their behavior. They created the fairy tale that there is a
>        license problem in cdrtools. They created a network of
>        "cooperation" and supported some people which created a fork of
>        cdrtools based on the fairy tale.....

I've read that, but
1)there is no *reference.* No link to a mailing list thread or such (I 
don't remember if even the infamous Debian bug where the licensing 
problem started is linked on Joerg pages, but at least it is easy to 
find it) -so I don't know if it's true or not. Maybe that' me being a 
scientist, so I am accustomed to expect at least a literature reference 
if there is a potentially questionable statement in a scientific paper 
-but I think it would help to actually see what he is talking about.

2)Statements like "now these people have been in trouble and needed an 
excuse for their behaviour" looks like pure conspiracy theory. Why a 
patch rejected puts people "in trouble"? Why did they need an "excuse"? 
There is no logic in that. Such claims require proof.

Again, it is entirely possible that Joerg, despite his somehow weird 
behaviour, could be right. But I fail to see the strong evidence that 
should backup his strong statements.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 28 June 2008, Daniel Iliev wrote:
> It seems to me that you are obliged to publish cdrtools under the GNU
> GPL until cdrtools contains at least one piece of work which is
> licensed under the GNU GPL. Actually that is what the GNU GPL is all
> about - to force you to keep the source of a given project open if
> you had used any GPLd work for that project.

To understand how to use the GPL it is necessary to understand what it 
was designed to do:

Create an entire body of free code that can never be made un-free.

That entire body is GNU. RMS says so in one of his many essays and faqs 
on the subject[1]. The original intent is obviously for people who want 
to contribute to GNU - they must license their code for GNU under GPL, 
and their code then becomes a coherent part of something much larger.

Picking and choosing bits of code here and there is liable to get one in 
trouble with incompatible licenses, as this is not the original intent.

> How can this be achieved? Simply the GPL applies itself to the whole
> system if even the smallest part of the system was licenced under it.

Yes, that is a side effect. But I don't think the intent was to infect 
other code with GPL due to the presence of GPL'ed code, as GNU was 
started to replace existing proprietary Unixes. More like new GPL code 
is added to the GNU that already exists.

Stunningly obvious conclusion:

Don't mix and match GPL code with other code (except BSD where this 
problem doesn't arise)

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sunday 29 June 2008, b.n. wrote:
> Again, it is entirely possible that Joerg, despite his somehow weird
> behaviour, could be right. But I fail to see the strong evidence that
> should backup his strong statements.

That is the same conclusion that so many other people have already come 
to.

Joerg consistently conducts debates in this manner, consistently does 
not answer direct questions and consistently does not back up his 
statements.

Hence the overriding opinion in the free software world that despite 
Joerg's undisputed coding skill (he truly is an excellent coder - read 
his stuff) and his considerable knowledge in this field, he is 
impossible to work with unless you agree to agree with him. The pain of 
trying to work with him dwarfs the benefit of using his code.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Again, it is entirely possible that Joerg, despite his somehow weird 
> behaviour, could be right. But I fail to see the strong evidence that 
> should backup his strong statements.

So you like to tell us that if a few people like to spread a lie, all they need
to do is to create a web of pointers to copies of this lie?

A single person who tells the truth seems to have no chance in your world
because people do not make a reality check on statements but just count the 
number of copies?

This "web of lies" is very efficient. Nobody seems to care that the claims 
from the people around Bloch live in a world of reversed timelines. Why else
would people believe claims that obviously reverse cause and effect?

It would be easy to check timelines to get an impression of the credibility 
of the people around Bloch.


I should mention that Bloch did not get much attention inside Debian with his 
hirst attack which started around 2004. The CDDL was accepted by Debian and 
nobody complained in February 2005 when I changed the first project from GPL to 
CDDL. Nothing happened after I published the first OpenSolaris distribution on 
June 17th 2005 - 3 days after the first OpenSolaris source was out. The attacks 
from Debian against the CDDL started in September 2005 after the Nexenta distro 
(Debian userland on top of Solaris) was published.

A year later but still a week _before_ the "cdrkit project" started, Debian 
finally accepted the CDDL as free license. The people from the cdrkit "project"
still claim that the "fork" was done because the CDDL is not free. Do you 
believe people who repeatedly contradict themself?


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:

> When I run cdda2wav -e -N -B I get:
> ===================================
> recording 3884.2933 seconds stereo with 16 bits @ 44100.0 Hz
> percent_done:
> 100%  track  1 recorded successfully
> ===================================
>
> The "recording" part confuses me.  Does this mean that the command actually 
> writes a file on my hard drive or just plays it by passing it on to /dev/dsp?  
> Am I going to run out of disk space?

-N means: do not create audio sample files

-e means: echo audio data to sound device (see -K) SOUND_DEV

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:

> Stroller wants to hear *your* point of view. As a token of respect for 
> all the users of your software (the original, not the fork) who are 
> here and reading this, could you please just describe your position, 
> and omit all references as to why other points of view are wrong.

He wrote that he is pissed off...

If he did not attack me, then he at least does not care whether he could.
I have been attacked for cdrtools and other software by many people in the
past. I expect some care from people who are really interested in information.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the
> Program", right?

If you believe this and what you claimed later, then the GPL would be 
a definitely non-free license. See the OpenSource definition at
http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd

Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way. This is
why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some years ago, the
FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in a way that makes it
compliant to the rules at http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Sascha Hlusiak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1661 bytes --]

Am Sonntag 29 Juni 2008 13:05:24 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Stroller wants to hear *your* point of view. As a token of respect for
> > all the users of your software (the original, not the fork) who are
> > here and reading this, could you please just describe your position,
> > and omit all references as to why other points of view are wrong.
>
> He wrote that he is pissed off...
If you quoted him correctly before, you'd know it was not meant as an attack. 
He wrote "[...] this latest thread just started to piss me off." It's not 
about you, neither about your work. It's about this thread! People have been 
extremely understanding in this thread for long but asking for the same 
information over and over again and those questions being ignored sure is 
tiring and "pissing people off". Don't you agree?

This thread is ridiculously long. People have kindly asked for information and 
references for your statements but all they got back is "they all are lying, 
don't believe anybody" and "why didn't you look yourself". You ignored 
important questions.

Isn't a lie usually a (wrong) statement without proof that is meant to be 
believed by the other? Why do you expect us to believe you when you don't 
give any references at all? Show us the lies they spread. And explain why 
they are wrong. Then people will believe you. But repeating "they are lying" 
over and over does not make it more true for us. Come on, all that people 
want are references. 


Say, isn't that thread pissing you off by now? It was pretty pointless till 
now, don't you agree?


Sascha

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The GPL tries to take off freedom in otder to keep freedom. This does
> > not work in most cases (I tried to sue two companies to no avail), so
> > why take off freedom at all?
> >
>
> OK, all this means that in your opinion CDDL is better than GPL, but
> by no means it grants you the right to disregard GPL in favour of CDDL. 
>
> Like it or not, there are GPL-ed pieces in cdrtools and if you want to
> use those pieces you have to comply with the GPL. That's the will of
> their respective authors. I don't like the EULA of Microsoft, so I
> don't use their products. It's as simple as that.

If you like to discuss things with the author of software you should not 
disregard his will.

The license change to a more free license on cdrtools has been planned since 
2001 which is long before the attacks from Eduard Bloch started.


> As I see it there are two options to stop the pointless discussion if
> CDDL and GPL can be legally mixed in cdrtools. First - revert back to
> GPL, second - move everything to CDDL. I see two solutions for the
> second choice:

Making pointless proposals like the one you did is one of the reasons why
there are endless discussions.

While the current license set up and the combination in use for cdrtools has 
been verified by specialized lawyers, the claims from the people around Bloch 
are all made by laymen only.

If you like it or not, the GPL has been intentionally made asymmetric to allow 
the combination used for mkisofs. If the GPL was defined the way some license 
trolls like to see it, then GPLd software would be illegal on MS-WIN, HP-UX, 
AIX, ... It was very important for Stallman to allow to use GPLd software on 
Closed Source operating systems and for this reason, the GPL allows GPLd code 
to use other code from any license.


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Again, it is entirely possible that Joerg, despite his somehow weird 
>> behaviour, could be right. But I fail to see the strong evidence that 
>> should backup his strong statements.
> 
> So you like to tell us that if a few people like to spread a lie, all they need
> to do is to create a web of pointers to copies of this lie?

Well, that's exactly what happens everyday. Welcome to the real world. :)

But that's irrelevant to our discussion, because I do not want a "web of 
pointers to copies". I want a single pointer to the (hopefully public) 
mailing list thread(s) where you discussed with Bloch and you were 
attacked by him.

Where is this thread?

> A single person who tells the truth seems to have no chance in your world
> because people do not make a reality check on statements but just count the 
> number of copies?

It has all chances possible. It is enough to bring *proof*. Not a 
billion copies of proof: just proof. That "number of copies" stuff is 
something you put into the discussion and that I never, ever asked for.

> It would be easy to check timelines to get an impression of the credibility 
> of the people around Bloch.
> 
> I should mention that Bloch did not get much attention inside Debian with his 
> hirst attack which started around 2004. The CDDL was accepted by Debian and 
> nobody complained in February 2005 when I changed the first project from GPL to 
> CDDL. Nothing happened after I published the first OpenSolaris distribution on 
> June 17th 2005 - 3 days after the first OpenSolaris source was out. The attacks 
> from Debian against the CDDL started in September 2005 after the Nexenta distro 
> (Debian userland on top of Solaris) was published.
> 
> A year later but still a week _before_ the "cdrkit project" started, Debian 
> finally accepted the CDDL as free license. The people from the cdrkit "project"
> still claim that the "fork" was done because the CDDL is not free. Do you 
> believe people who repeatedly contradict themself?

I don't care about "credibility". I care about individual statements.
As far as I have understood, the problem is not CDDL not being free, but 
being incompatible with the GPL in the particular build system you 
choose for cdrtools. So, I see no contradiction here. Maybe I'm wrong, 
but again, we want *proof*.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Sascha Hlusiak <saschahlusiak@arcor.de> wrote:

> Am Sonntag 29 Juni 2008 13:05:24 schrieb Joerg Schilling:
> > Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Stroller wants to hear *your* point of view. As a token of respect for
> > > all the users of your software (the original, not the fork) who are
> > > here and reading this, could you please just describe your position,
> > > and omit all references as to why other points of view are wrong.
> >
> > He wrote that he is pissed off...
> If you quoted him correctly before, you'd know it was not meant as an attack. 
> He wrote "[...] this latest thread just started to piss me off." It's not 
> about you, neither about your work. It's about this thread! People have been 
> extremely understanding in this thread for long but asking for the same 
> information over and over again and those questions being ignored sure is 

If he is interested in a real discussion, he could try to be more obvious and 
avoid to point to questionable claims.

There is a different way of asking that does not create the impression that you 
stand behind the claims from a quoted URL.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> > "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Again, it is entirely possible that Joerg, despite his somehow weird 
> >> behaviour, could be right. But I fail to see the strong evidence that 
> >> should backup his strong statements.
> > 
> > So you like to tell us that if a few people like to spread a lie, all they need
> > to do is to create a web of pointers to copies of this lie?
>
> Well, that's exactly what happens everyday. Welcome to the real world. :)
>
> But that's irrelevant to our discussion, because I do not want a "web of 
> pointers to copies". I want a single pointer to the (hopefully public) 
> mailing list thread(s) where you discussed with Bloch and you were 
> attacked by him.
>
> Where is this thread?

Bloch did run these attacks in private mail.


> I don't care about "credibility". I care about individual statements.
> As far as I have understood, the problem is not CDDL not being free, but 
> being incompatible with the GPL in the particular build system you 
> choose for cdrtools. So, I see no contradiction here. Maybe I'm wrong, 
> but again, we want *proof*.

If you claim that what I do with mkisofs is not legal, you would need to
prove this. As it seems that you cannot prove this claim, please stop spreading 
it.


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Sascha Hlusiak]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1590 bytes --]

> > > He wrote that he is pissed off...
> >
> > If you quoted him correctly before, you'd know it was not meant as an
> > attack. He wrote "[...] this latest thread just started to piss me off."
> > It's not about you, neither about your work. It's about this thread!
> > People have been extremely understanding in this thread for long but
> > asking for the same information over and over again and those questions
> > being ignored sure is
>
> If he is interested in a real discussion, he could try to be more obvious
> and avoid to point to questionable claims.
Since you refused to give and references to your claims he searched himself 
and came up with those articles. At least he came up with something that we 
can base a discussion on, maybe it be true or not, serious or not. It would 
have been so easy to explain, where those articles are not correct. Instead 
of using this excellent opportunity to explain the background, you refused to 
discuss it at all.

> There is a different way of asking that does not create the impression that
> you stand behind the claims from a quoted URL.
The information given from this URLs seemed to explain things a bit and do not 
look like completely wrong. I'd rather have some questionable reference that 
we can talk about than no reference at all. Even lies and questionable 
articles can be used for discussion. 

You agree that referring to a non public email attack is of absolutely no 
value nor interest for us. You might want to publish those email threads, if 
you want to prove your point.

Sascha

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[James]

Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling <at> fokus.fraunhofer.de> writes:


> Bloch did run these attacks in private mail.

Irrelevant for 99.999% of gentoo users...


> > I don't care about "credibility". I care about individual
 statements.
> > As far as I have understood, the problem is not CDDL not being 
free, but 
> > being incompatible with the GPL in the particular build 
system you 
> > choose for cdrtools. So, I see no contradiction here. Maybe 
I'm wrong, 
> > but again, we want *proof*.

No, most users simply do not care. I have written several times 
that the entire "license" issue is *horse shit*, imho.

Let the individual decide what they want to use. Give use choices.
I, for one, believe that the GPL is a giant conspiracy to keep the
poor and the lowest among us as serfs, unable to use open or free
software to make money. ALL of the licenses stink. BSD is the best,
but it has it's issues to. To me, if you publish sourcecode, it's
an open license to do what the hell I want with it. *period*.

I can say with with a clear conscious. We here where I exist, do
firmware, and NEVER use others' code. Most code, for embedded systems
is bloated and does not run as it should. In embedded, less is
always superior. So we do not make a single dime out of any
published code. Most of it sucks, compared to optimized, singularly
focused assembler/C. Our code is portable on a wide range of
of processors, because we read the data sheets of the processors and
optimized code, based on the strength of the given target. This
is the basis for the previous paragraph. The basis of publishing
code, that is portable, is for those less fortunate to be functional
within a networked community. Folks with money can purchase the
best. Folks with technical expertise can write software. Commoners
often do not understand the choices and are slave to advertisements.

So from where I sit all of this "hot air" surrounding open sources
is about jocking for control of the masses. If you want to truly
benefit the "common man" (the average computer illiterate) then 
just publish the sources and let folks assimilate the code as they
see fit. *period*. Better yet, build a distro and tools that help 
the commoners assimilate these softwares as the individual sees fit.
If you are contributing to opensource and receive a paycheck, then
do as you are told. But, *PLEASE* stop sling crap about the
purity of the GPL. Let your Harvard-MBA-idiot manager do that,
as that what he/she receives a paycheck for.

Jesus Christ, did not ordain GPL, so everyone should stop acting
like the GPL is some sort of "devine gift" (far from it as far as
I'm concerned). But GPL is OK. GPL is like a 5 year business plan.
I'm not so certain that CDDL is any better; but, *nobody cares*.
But since they  publish sources, then use it
or not; let the individual decide. What I do not need or want
is some *sanctimonious prick* making this decision for me.


> If you claim that what I do with mkisofs is not legal, you 
would need to
> prove this. As it seems that you cannot prove this claim, 
please stop spreading 
> it.

Maybe, you need to calm down and explain things for us commoners?
Clear and simple, leaving out the conspiracies and emotionalism?

Just clearly and simply post your offering and your work around.

After all, gentoo supports another system for package management
paludis, that is from another radical (whom I admire very much).
Portage/Paludis is at the very heart of Gentoo, yet the community
is strong enough to endure the choice and prosper. Surely you can
make simple technical (non emotional) arguments, build a package
and let us test it? I'd be curious if the gentoo leadership does not
allow you to put something into Sunrise....

Maybe state your technical && focused solution in a "howto" or a 
wiki so we can install and test your offering. Put a link to all
of the emotional stuffage (mostly for your own benefit) and let the
wider gentoo community test your offering?  After all, if you
win over the greater gentoo community, who cares about Suse, Redhat,
Sun or Redmond? They are irrelevant, from where I sit.

> Jörg

Your musings are your own burden. If you have a valid point, 
make it, in a simple and clear form and package up your 
wares so the "commoners" can use  them on Gentoo.
As far as I'm aware, gentoo has project Sunrise and others where 
users, commoners and the rest can put up packages that are not
sanctified by the *sanctimonious pricks* of the world.


Is your offering there?

In gentoo, you'll find many radicals that do not fit into any
other matrix, GPL included.

also, may the peace of Jesus Christ find you.


James






-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:37:12 +0200
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:

> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the
> > Program", right?
> 
> If you believe this and what you claimed later, then the GPL would be 
> a definitely non-free license. See the OpenSource definition at
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd

No, I don't believe in anything. I'm just trying to provoke you to
finally explain those things here. You see, I'm such kind of person,
who even doesn't need you to show any reference to public sources where
the attacks against you could be seen. I would understand and accept
your position even if you had only explained it and answered
the questions it arises.

Unfortunately you don't do that. You don't say "There is no problem in
mixing GPL and CDDL in cdrtools because...", the only thing I saw you
saying was "If there is problem with cdrtools, the fork has the same
problem and another 10000 other problems"

Well, I don't give a damn if the fork has any problems, I don't use it,
I use your package, cdrtools. So, I'm interested only and only in the
cdrtools case.

Yes, the questions that I'm arising were originally asked by the people
you say attacked you, I don't try to hide that. The problem is I see
logic in those questions and unfortunately I never saw you or anyone
else for that matter explaining why there is no problem to mix CDDL and
GPL in cdrtools.

The only thing I saw was something like "I consulted layers and they
said there was no problem". Well, that's not enough. Quote those
layers. Ask them to allow you to make their statement public and
publish it. Do something logical at last for crying out loud!

> 
> Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way.
> This is why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some
> years ago, the FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in
> a way that makes it compliant to the rules at
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> 
> Jörg
> 

Alright! GPL is bad! But it out is there, and some parts of cdrtools are
under that bad license. Like it or not, you have to obey it. So,
please, explain how one (meaning you) could mix GPL and CDDL w/o
violating GPL.

Interpret it for me, please.


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

PLEASE IGNORE my previous message.


I saw Joerg had replied after I sent it,
so it is irrelevant in the new context.



-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>> But that's irrelevant to our discussion, because I do not want a "web of 
>> pointers to copies". I want a single pointer to the (hopefully public) 
>> mailing list thread(s) where you discussed with Bloch and you were 
>> attacked by him.
>>
>> Where is this thread?
> 
> Bloch did run these attacks in private mail.

I'm sure you can post the mail exchange *in full* on your website, 
therefore. So -hey!- you can show the world how Bloch is the asshole you 
say he is. What's better than that to bring people on your side?

>> I don't care about "credibility". I care about individual statements.
>> As far as I have understood, the problem is not CDDL not being free, but 
>> being incompatible with the GPL in the particular build system you 
>> choose for cdrtools. So, I see no contradiction here. Maybe I'm wrong, 
>> but again, we want *proof*.
> 
> If you claim that what I do with mkisofs is not legal, you would need to
> prove this. As it seems that you cannot prove this claim, please stop spreading 
> it.

I don't claim anything nor I spread anything. I want proof of claims, so 
I can make my opinion on them. Proof. Evidence.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Iliev]

On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:02:23 +0200
Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (Joerg Schilling) wrote:

> 
> While the current license set up and the combination in use for
> cdrtools has been verified by specialized lawyers, the claims from
> the people around Bloch are all made by laymen only.
> 

Very well. This could end the discussion in your favour very easy.
Is it possible to publish the original statement of your lawyers on your
site? I believe that would be a very good proof of everything you say.


-- 
Best regards,
Daniel
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 29 Jun 2008, at 12:05, Joerg Schilling wrote:

> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Stroller wants to hear *your* point of view. As a token of respect  
>> for
>> all the users of your software (the original, not the fork) who are
>> here and reading this, could you please just describe your position,
>> and omit all references as to why other points of view are wrong.
>
> He wrote that he is pissed off...
>
> If he did not attack me, then he at least does not care whether he  
> could.

I wrote that the *thread* - digressing from useful discussion about  
software tools and into religion - was pissing me off.

I asked because I wanted to hear your point of view and your reason  
(for changing license to CDDL). This is not very obvious when  
searching the web, and the reason given on your website (which I only  
found after asking the question) is somewhat vague.

Why is the CDDL "more free" and why do you particularly like it?

I wanted to hear your opinion and what you wanted to say - I was  
genuinely interested in your side of the story. Considering how much  
else you've written in this thread that seems little enough to ask.

When I searched the web I rather expected to find loads of mailing- 
list posts, blog entries and other articles and that half of them  
would announce what a rotter you are, the other half how poor old  
Joerg has been stitched up. But it is NOT so obvious from Googling.

Since this is the case you would benefit your case by explaining  
better on your website.

As I told you already I might quite aggressively support your  
software if you would just make the effort to convince me. No one  
else on this list mistook my question for antagonism. I deliberately  
tried to be polite and tactful when asking you, and it did me no good  
at all! Frankly, therefore, I can see why everyone is "against you"  
if you insist on misconstruing an innocent question as an attack. If  
my example is anything to go by then I can only assume that the whole  
Debian and Bloch fiasco is the result of your own over-reaction  
(sorry to be so honest about how I see things!).

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Stroller]

On 29 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> ...
> There is a different way of asking that does not create the  
> impression that you
> stand behind the claims from a quoted URL.

I don't believe that:

   A bit of Googling lead me to a couple of articles which appear to
   indicate you chose to migrate your software from the GPL to the
   CDDL (or to a CDDL-alike license).

indicates I "stand behind" the articles which mention this, nor any  
other points that those articles make.

You'll also note that at that stage, when I originally asked, I did  
not refer to being "pissed off". I said:

   Since I guess there's no point in hoping this "discussion" will
   simply go away, might I enquire out of curiosity why you decided
   to do this?

I am sorry I offended you, Joerg, but your are making it impossible  
to be your friend.

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Sebastian Günther]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2577 bytes --]

* Joerg Schilling (Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) [29.06.08 13:38]:
> Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > So, mkisofs.c is the "Program" and cdrtools is a "work based on the
> > Program", right?
> 
> If you believe this and what you claimed later, then the GPL would be 
> a definitely non-free license. See the OpenSource definition at
> http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> 
> Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way. This is
> why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some years ago, the
> FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in a way that makes it
> compliant to the rules at http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> 

And that is the bottom of the line in this whole elaborate discussion:
The definition of freedom.

I *like* the GPL because of that "You have all the freedom, exept to cut 
down this freedom"-attitude. It is like: I am a tolerant person, but not 
to intolerant people. And as another example: The german constitution 
also prohibits the change of the articles that guarantee human rights.

Other may find this as a restricting of their freedom, for me it is the 
only guarantee of the freedom. We are talking about licences, quite 
the same as laws. They define the last ressort, the line no one should 
be able to cross.

For the academic field a BSD-like licence is a very good choice, because 
one can publish it to a broad community, yet allow the moneygivers to 
use it in their commercial, closed product.

And if I wrote software, I would not want people to reuse the codeit in 
closed  source. So GPL is the right choice for me, because of the viral 
and supposed non-free issue.

But note:

This is *my* choice, and if somone wants to use another license, fine 
with me.

But remember, if more people contibute to a software project, then the 
license is some essential part of the collaboration. Changing it 
requires the consensus of *all* people who *ever* contributed to it.

So changing a license is always cumbersome.

These are general thoughts, not personally againt you,

> Jörg
> 

Now my critisism on your decision:
I regard the license change as weakening of freedom, reasons are 
hopefully clear from the above statements.

And yes I am radical:

I don't like the capitalism, and I found a little socialism in the GPL. 
And I will fight to protect it!

Sebastian

-- 
 " Religion ist das Opium des Volkes. "      Karl Marx

 SEB@STI@N GÜNTHER         mailto:samson@guenther-roetgen.de

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Sebastian Günther <samson@guenther-roetgen.de> wrote:

> > Unfortunately the GPL has not been written in an unambiguous way. This is
> > why the OSI rated the GPL as non-free for several years. Some years ago, the
> > FSF explained that the GPL needs to be interpreted in a way that makes it
> > compliant to the rules at http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
> > 
>
> And that is the bottom of the line in this whole elaborate discussion:
> The definition of freedom.
>
> I *like* the GPL because of that "You have all the freedom, exept to cut 
> down this freedom"-attitude. It is like: I am a tolerant person, but not 
> to intolerant people. And as another example: The german constitution 
> also prohibits the change of the articles that guarantee human rights.

You seem to have a major missunderstanding with the background ot the 
constitution. The constitution has not been written to save the constitution
while ignoring possible harm to the people. The constitution does not give 
asymmetric rights to parts of the whole population only.

The GPL however limits the usability of OpenSource as OSS and claims this
is in order to save OSS. The GPL allows GPLd software to use any kind of 
software but disallows other OpenSource Software to use GPLd software.

Another big problem with the GPL is that the Free Software Foundation does not 
care about leality in own projects. There are at least two official FSF 
projects that did ilegally change the license of the code they use from other 
projects. libcdio did change code taken from cdrtools from GPLv2-only to 
GPLv2-or-any-later and vcdimager publishes code under GPL that never has been 
put under GPL by the author.



> And if I wrote software, I would not want people to reuse the codeit in 
> closed  source. So GPL is the right choice for me, because of the viral 
> and supposed non-free issue.

If you like this, you do not need to forbid to use the software for other OSS
as done by the GPL. 
 

> But remember, if more people contibute to a software project, then the 
> license is some essential part of the collaboration. Changing it 
> requires the consensus of *all* people who *ever* contributed to it.

You are obviously uninformed about legal facts. In Europe as well as in the 
USA, "minor contributors" are not given the right to decide on this.

> So changing a license is always cumbersome.

Then you should be against the GPL as many GPL people take BSD code 
and illegally add GPL tags. This may be tolerated by the authors but it is 
still forbidden by law.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> >> But that's irrelevant to our discussion, because I do not want a "web of 
> >> pointers to copies". I want a single pointer to the (hopefully public) 
> >> mailing list thread(s) where you discussed with Bloch and you were 
> >> attacked by him.
> >>
> >> Where is this thread?
> > 
> > Bloch did run these attacks in private mail.
>
> I'm sure you can post the mail exchange *in full* on your website, 
> therefore. So -hey!- you can show the world how Bloch is the asshole you 
> say he is. What's better than that to bring people on your side?

If I was wrong, he could try to sue me.....

But then I would show the mail containing the insults to the judge.

So he does not sue me ;-)

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:

> I wrote that the *thread* - digressing from useful discussion about  
> software tools and into religion - was pissing me off.

This is why I tried not to answer your first question. I know that this usually 
happens and try to avoid it.


> I asked because I wanted to hear your point of view and your reason  
> (for changing license to CDDL). This is not very obvious when  
> searching the web, and the reason given on your website (which I only  
> found after asking the question) is somewhat vague.
>
> Why is the CDDL "more free" and why do you particularly like it?

Well, the information is in the cdrtools FAQ and parts are in the Sun CDDL FAQ.


> When I searched the web I rather expected to find loads of mailing- 
> list posts, blog entries and other articles and that half of them  
> would announce what a rotter you are, the other half how poor old  
> Joerg has been stitched up. But it is NOT so obvious from Googling.

Charity is what you get for free, enviousness is something you need to earn ;-)

You get this kind of enemies if you get a certain degree of familarity.


> As I told you already I might quite aggressively support your  
> software if you would just make the effort to convince me. No one  
> else on this list mistook my question for antagonism. I deliberately  
> tried to be polite and tactful when asking you, and it did me no good  
> at all! Frankly, therefore, I can see why everyone is "against you"  
> if you insist on misconstruing an innocent question as an attack. If  
> my example is anything to go by then I can only assume that the whole  
> Debian and Bloch fiasco is the result of your own over-reaction  
> (sorry to be so honest about how I see things!).

This is obviously a missinterpretation of the facts.


What people with english mothertonge believe is a courtesy, is usually 
seen as a underlying attack by Germans. Try to just be direct and there will
be less missunderstanding.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:

> I am sorry I offended you, Joerg, but your are making it impossible  
> to be your friend.

You could learn to be direct and tell people what you mean. 
You asked in a missleading way on a list where hostile statements from 
other people have already been seen.

As I said: less than 20% of human communication is done via words.

If I did see you, I would have known whether your non-direct posting was meant 
to have an underlying hostile base or not. As I cannot see you, the only way
to avoid missunderstanding is to use unambiguous words.


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[brullo nulla]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Joerg Schilling
<Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> You could learn to be direct and tell people what you mean.
> You asked in a missleading way on a list where hostile statements from
> other people have already been seen.
>
> As I said: less than 20% of human communication is done via words.
>
> If I did see you, I would have known whether your non-direct posting was meant
> to have an underlying hostile base or not. As I cannot see you, the only way
> to avoid missunderstanding is to use unambiguous words.

Tip: do not assume people on a mailing list have an "underlying
hostile base" unless they are explicitly hostile. Otherwise you're
just putting fuel on flames.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Sebastian Günther]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3427 bytes --]

* Joerg Schilling (Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) [30.06.08 10:48]:

> The GPL however limits the usability of OpenSource as OSS and claims this
> is in order to save OSS. The GPL allows GPLd software to use any kind of 
> software but disallows other OpenSource Software to use GPLd software.
> 
The main point is that this also disallows the usage within NonOSS 
software. That's what counts. Many OSS licenses do not care about later 
closed usage, and so one backdoor is closed, where GPL code may become 
unfree.
For me, some of the so called OSS licenses undermine the freedom and I 
don't want them to be spread anymore. BSD is the one license where 
freedom goes the step to far and is suicide.

> Another big problem with the GPL is that the Free Software Foundation does not 
> care about leality in own projects. There are at least two official FSF 
> projects that did ilegally change the license of the code they use from other 
> projects. libcdio did change code taken from cdrtools from GPLv2-only to 
> GPLv2-or-any-later and vcdimager publishes code under GPL that never has been 
> put under GPL by the author.
> 
That's not a problem of the GPL, but of the FSF. You can't blame the GPL 
for that.
And I'm just curious: under which license was that code, which is now 
in vcdimager?  

> 
> > And if I wrote software, I would not want people to reuse the codeit in 
> > closed  source. So GPL is the right choice for me, because of the viral 
> > and supposed non-free issue.
> 
> If you like this, you do not need to forbid to use the software for other OSS
> as done by the GPL. 
>  
This is a all or nothing matter, or you end up categorizing every single 
license if it fits. 

<overstatement>
And remember the GPL is a virus, that wants world domination.
</overstatement>

> 
> > But remember, if more people contibute to a software project, then the 
> > license is some essential part of the collaboration. Changing it 
> > requires the consensus of *all* people who *ever* contributed to it.
> 
> You are obviously uninformed about legal facts. In Europe as well as in the 
> USA, "minor contributors" are not given the right to decide on this.
> 
Well, in which crude copyright law is this stated? link please.
I think it is more a problem of the enforcement, not the laws itself. If 
you do not fight for your right, you loose it. But I agree, that in our 
society, it is a matter of money. But that is a problem in society.

> > So changing a license is always cumbersome.
> 
> Then you should be against the GPL as many GPL people take BSD code 
> and illegally add GPL tags. This may be tolerated by the authors but it is 
> still forbidden by law.
> 
That is *again* not an issue of the GPL but of the authors, s.o., and 
the licences changers. It's a people problem.

And an issue of the BSD license: I'm not quite sure, but can't you do
anything with source code under BSD licences, as long this infamous 
copyright notice stays?

What can happen to BSD code is shown with Kerberos, which ended up in 
Active Directory with some uncompatiple changes and some really lousy, 
security short commings.

> Jörg
> 

When it is free, than it shall be free from here to eternity.
Sebastian

-- 
 " Religion ist das Opium des Volkes. "      Karl Marx

 SEB@STI@N GÜNTHER         mailto:samson@guenther-roetgen.de

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
>>>> But that's irrelevant to our discussion, because I do not want a "web of 
>>>> pointers to copies". I want a single pointer to the (hopefully public) 
>>>> mailing list thread(s) where you discussed with Bloch and you were 
>>>> attacked by him.
>>>>
>>>> Where is this thread?
>>> Bloch did run these attacks in private mail.
>> I'm sure you can post the mail exchange *in full* on your website, 
>> therefore. So -hey!- you can show the world how Bloch is the asshole you 
>> say he is. What's better than that to bring people on your side?
> 
> If I was wrong, he could try to sue me.....
> 
> But then I would show the mail containing the insults to the judge.
> 
> So he does not sue me ;-)

And why can't you show these mails to us?

Bloch could also well not give a f**k about your claims and maybe does 
not want to spend money etc. just to sue an upset programmer. I most 
probably wouldn't sue you, if I was him.

You're tiptoeing around the main issue, that is: You bring no proof of 
your most important claims. You cannot expect widespread support of your 
cause without proof.

If you want us on your side, Show. The. Evidence.

m.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bloch could also well not give a f**k about your claims and maybe does 
> not want to spend money etc. just to sue an upset programmer. I most 
> probably wouldn't sue you, if I was him.
>
> You're tiptoeing around the main issue, that is: You bring no proof of 
> your most important claims. You cannot expect widespread support of your 
> cause without proof.
>
> If you want us on your side, Show. The. Evidence.

I am not going to do illegal things, therefore I cannot show the evidence.
If needed, I will show it a judge.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[b.n.]

Joerg Schilling ha scritto:
> "b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Bloch could also well not give a f**k about your claims and maybe does 
>> not want to spend money etc. just to sue an upset programmer. I most 
>> probably wouldn't sue you, if I was him.
>>
>> You're tiptoeing around the main issue, that is: You bring no proof of 
>> your most important claims. You cannot expect widespread support of your 
>> cause without proof.
>>
>> If you want us on your side, Show. The. Evidence.
> 
> I am not going to do illegal things, therefore I cannot show the evidence.
> If needed, I will show it a judge.

I didn't know that showing a mail *you* received is illegal. Maybe I can 
contact Bloch and ask him permission?

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Mike Edenfield]

b.n. wrote:

> I didn't know that showing a mail *you* received is illegal. Maybe I can 
> contact Bloch and ask him permission?

I think this thread has long since left the topic of Gentoo 
in the dust.  If you cannot just accept that Joerg is not 
going to be cooperative on this issue and drop it, can you 
please at least take this private?

--Mike

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 352 bytes --]

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 01:15:58 +0200, b.n. wrote:

> I didn't know that showing a mail *you* received is illegal.

It may not be illegal, but it is definitely wrong. Private mail is just
that.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Programming Language: (n.) a shorthand way of describing a series of bugs
                      to a computer or a programmer.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

"brullo nulla" <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> > As I said: less than 20% of human communication is done via words.
> >
> > If I did see you, I would have known whether your non-direct posting was meant
> > to have an underlying hostile base or not. As I cannot see you, the only way
> > to avoid missunderstanding is to use unambiguous words.
>
> Tip: do not assume people on a mailing list have an "underlying
> hostile base" unless they are explicitly hostile. Otherwise you're
> just putting fuel on flames.

There is at lest one person who posted last night and who makes it hard to 
believe there is no hostility ;-(

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Mike Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org> wrote:

> I think this thread has long since left the topic of Gentoo 
> in the dust.  If you cannot just accept that Joerg is not 
> going to be cooperative on this issue and drop it, can you 
> please at least take this private?

I am very cooperative. Some people are not. 

The main problem in this discussion is that people repeat wrong claims from 
Bloch and some Debian folks. 

I am cooperative, but I am not willing to deal with obvious lies. 
If you have something subtancial, you should be able to first prove it before 
asking me.....

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> and install cdda2wav suid root.

Giving the user full access to the cdrom device isnt't enough ?
Actually, I really dislike to whole idea of suid root.

> Then call:
> 
> cdda2wav -e -N -B 
> 
> If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.

cdd2wav is directly writing to the audio device ? 
IMHO not good idea: you're bound to the devices cdda2wav supports,
requires it to be ported to each single audio interface you want
to use (not just platform specifics, but also things like audio
servers, clients which want non-standard config, ... ):(

I'd prefer using a pipe.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> A big problem is that on Linux _some_ SCSI commands may be send to drives

Which commands does it affect, and are they needed for playback ?


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> cdda2wav has an interactive mode since yesterday.

Can ths code be opted-out at compile time ? 
I, personally, don't want like to have unnedded features on 
my system (-> userflag ?)


BTW: could cdda2wav live as an separate package ?


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> Some  years ago, the Music Mafia did start to sell defective 
> disks that look similar to CDs, but this is a different story.

Yep, I recently had an dvd which didn't play on my notebook,
couldn't read a single block :(
Luckily I didn't buy it. 

In these days you have to be *really* careful what to buy.

BTW: a friend of mine is lawyer and music producer. I'm trying
to convince him to admonish those companies which intentionally
sell broken products ... would be nice if he'd really do this :)
Joerg, do you feel confident enough in the area to provide a 
expertise which could stand in court ?


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> First, libcdio had an illegal license change: the "authors" took a lot of the
> code from cdrtools and claim that "their" code (e.g. derived from cdda2wav) is 
> GPLv2-or-any-later. Well, not a single file from cdda2wav has ever been released
> under this license.

Ah, then you as the original author (right ?) to stop them from 
that copyright infringenment. In the end they, IMHO, have two options:

a) remove/replace your code
b) release libcdio under your terms (CDDL ?)

If they choose b), what consequences does it have for importing 
packages ? Is, eg., GPL'ed code allowed to import this lib ?

If yes, then I don't see a major problem, besides that bundling of
that lib isn't allowed anymore (hah, I'd like to see that folks
like Rich Felker thing about this ;-P).

> If you run sound-juicer, then gstreamer (being LGPL) loads and calls libcdio 
> which is GPL. This is not allowed by the GPL. GPL and LGPL are incompatible.

ACK. That's one of those points why I thing, libraries should LGPL 
instead of GPL (I admit, I'm as careful as I should be about that w/
some of my own packages yet, but just due lack of time - on request
my GPL'ed libs will be moved to LGPL)

> While the GPL is asymmetric and allows GPL code to call code under any license,
> GPLd code is not allowed to be called from non-GPL code.

Yep, that's the "viral effect". I, personally like this concept,
but everybody should decide for his own.

BUT: please, please no flamewar about license philosophies.

cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

> You are publishing the cdrtools package. The cdrtools package "in whole
> or in part contains" mkisofs.c. So, "you must cause" the cdrtools
> package "to be licensed as a whole" under the terms of the GNU GPL,
> right?

So, in other words, mkisofs cannot be included in an package that
is not GPL'ed, right ?

Wouldn't it solve the problem to just move out mkisofs to it's own
package ?


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> > I *like* the GPL because of that "You have all the freedom, exept to cut 
> > down this freedom"-attitude. It is like: I am a tolerant person, but not 
> > to intolerant people. And as another example: The german constitution 
> > also prohibits the change of the articles that guarantee human rights.
> 
> You seem to have a major missunderstanding with the background ot the 
> constitution. The constitution has not been written to save the constitution
> while ignoring possible harm to the people. The constitution does not give 
> asymmetric rights to parts of the whole population only.

Oh, it *does*. It reserves violential force to certain state instituions
only (eg. police, military). Special people are allowed carry around 
(and also use!) lethal weapons, while the "common man" is prohibited to
do so (in contrast to eg. the US constitution) - this is often called
the "monopoly of force", which the majority of politicians and lawyers
here see vital to form an state. At this point the German basic law
(which actually isn't a real constitution) is very asymetric at this point.

But: it stricly limits the power of the state as on the use of violence 
(eg. killing people who are not currently trying to kill others IS NOT
allowed, even if the current administration wants to do this!), splits
the power of the state into the three main (ideally independent) major
forces. In strong contrast, the EU does none of this (even allowing 
death penalty and using military force against demonstrators, just on
decision of the administration) - it is in neither way constitutional,
nor parlamentaric, nor democratic.

> The GPL however limits the usability of OpenSource as OSS and claims this
> is in order to save OSS. The GPL allows GPLd software to use any kind of 
> software but disallows other OpenSource Software to use GPLd software.

Right, that's what it has been built for. For good reasons. But nobody
is required to like this. It's a contract, not a law, so you're free
to go into the game or stay out. Same applies to all the other licenses.

> Another big problem with the GPL is that the Free Software Foundation does 
> not care about leality in own projects. There are at least two official FSF 
> projects that did ilegally change the license of the code they use from other 
> projects. libcdio did change code taken from cdrtools from GPLv2-only to 
> GPLv2-or-any-later and vcdimager publishes code under GPL that never has been 
> put under GPL by the author.

The pure existance of contracts doesn't imply that everyone complies 
with agreements he had made. That's what civil courts are for.
(btw: breaking licenses may also be criminal)

> > And if I wrote software, I would not want people to reuse the codeit in 
> > closed  source. So GPL is the right choice for me, because of the viral 
> > and supposed non-free issue.
> 
> If you like this, you do not need to forbid to use the software for other OSS
> as done by the GPL. 

The point is, the GPL requires everyone who uses derived work to be 
published under the same terms. Fine for some people, but not for 
others. But it's just a contract between the original authors and
those who want to derive work. You're not forced to do so, it's just
one option of many.

> > But remember, if more people contibute to a software project, then the 
> > license is some essential part of the collaboration. Changing it 
> > requires the consensus of *all* people who *ever* contributed to it.
> 
> You are obviously uninformed about legal facts. In Europe as well as in the 
> USA, "minor contributors" are not given the right to decide on this.

Any sources on that, at least for Germany ?
Ah, please forget EU directives, as long as they're not explicitly 
implemented in our law (passed both houses). The EU, according to
German base law and laws of nations has *NO* real legal power - 
it's almost completely based on constitutional violations (at least
for Germany, but most likely for the other member nations).


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Sebastian Günther <samson@guenther-roetgen.de> wrote:

> The main point is that this also disallows the usage within NonOSS 
> software. That's what counts. Many OSS licenses do not care about later 
> closed usage, and so one backdoor is closed, where GPL code may become 
> unfree.
> For me, some of the so called OSS licenses undermine the freedom and I 
> don't want them to be spread anymore. BSD is the one license where 
> freedom goes the step to far and is suicide.

We already had to learn these hard lessons in xf86 times (and still going 
on w/ x.org): hw companies can close the sources of their own forks and
do not need to give back anything. It even gets worse with the Linux kernel,
where those trolls are allowed to publish propriatary driver crap (yes,
99% of the proprietary kernel drivers I had to cope with, like nv stuff 
*are* really crap which tends to lock up the whole machine). At least for
the vital parts of a system, this is very bad.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > First, libcdio had an illegal license change: the "authors" took a lot of the
> > code from cdrtools and claim that "their" code (e.g. derived from cdda2wav) is 
> > GPLv2-or-any-later. Well, not a single file from cdda2wav has ever been released
> > under this license.
>
> Ah, then you as the original author (right ?) to stop them from 
> that copyright infringenment. In the end they, IMHO, have two options:
>
> a) remove/replace your code
> b) release libcdio under your terms (CDDL ?)

I am not the person who did put the code together as "libcdio". This was the 
FSF. We are talking about a Copyright violation done by the FSF.


> > If you run sound-juicer, then gstreamer (being LGPL) loads and calls libcdio 
> > which is GPL. This is not allowed by the GPL. GPL and LGPL are incompatible.
>
> ACK. That's one of those points why I thing, libraries should LGPL 
> instead of GPL (I admit, I'm as careful as I should be about that w/
> some of my own packages yet, but just due lack of time - on request
> my GPL'ed libs will be moved to LGPL)

The FSF has no choice to make the code LGPL, converting from GPLv2-only is 
already more than they are allowed to do.

> BUT: please, please no flamewar about license philosophies.

I am not interested in license wars. I get the impression that some people 
start flamewars because I am relaxed about licenses and do not try to make a 
religion out of a license.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Daniel Iliev <daniel.iliev@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > You are publishing the cdrtools package. The cdrtools package "in whole
> > or in part contains" mkisofs.c. So, "you must cause" the cdrtools
> > package "to be licensed as a whole" under the terms of the GNU GPL,
> > right?
>
> So, in other words, mkisofs cannot be included in an package that
> is not GPL'ed, right ?
>
> Wouldn't it solve the problem to just move out mkisofs to it's own
> package ?

The main problem would be solved if Daniel Iliev did inform himself correctly 
what's done in cdrtools and did not post ridiculous claims.

I cannot comment claims that have no relation at all to the reality in cdrtools.
If he continues to post this kind of claims, I need to ignore him. In order to 
discuss licensing of cdrtools, some basic knowledge about facts is needed. It 
does not help to write claims that do not apply to cdrtools as he did.





Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > and install cdda2wav suid root.
>
> Giving the user full access to the cdrom device isnt't enough ?
> Actually, I really dislike to whole idea of suid root.
>
> > Then call:
> > 
> > cdda2wav -e -N -B 
> > 
> > If everything is OK, then you will be able to listen to the music.
>
> cdd2wav is directly writing to the audio device ? 
> IMHO not good idea: you're bound to the devices cdda2wav supports,
> requires it to be ported to each single audio interface you want
> to use (not just platform specifics, but also things like audio
> servers, clients which want non-standard config, ... ):(

I recomment you to read the cdda2wav man page to understand how it is working.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> Wouldn't it solve the problem to just move out mkisofs to it's own
> package ?

let me add a second answer to the serious part of the question.

Would it make Linux distribution xxzzy legal if the X binaries were
moved into a different distribution?

How would you answer this question?

Let me give you another example:

Do you still whack your wife? Answer only with yes or no.......


The FSF claims that the GPL is a truely free OSS License and
follows the rules from: http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd
In order to do this the GPL is not allowed (amongst others) to 
influence other software that is distributed on the same medium.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Aaron Clark]

For those still searching for background on this topic to try and  
understand the effects and discussions of the GPL vs CDDL licensing in  
other distros and how this may affect your use on Gentoo, you may find  
the respective articles on wikipedia instructive.  Don't just read the  
brief blurbs included in Wikipedia, but take a look at the citations  
included in the articles as well.  I'm not sure it gives all sides of  
the discussion, but it should be illuminating on some of the  
background details that people were requesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cdrtools#Licensing_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cdrkit#Fork

Aaron

P.S. I'm fully aware that the text of the wiki articles may be  
considered biased, that's a topic to take up on Wikipedia and not  
here.  I'm just using the articles as a jumping point to what appear  
to be primary sources so people can draw their own conclusions.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > Some  years ago, the Music Mafia did start to sell defective 
> > disks that look similar to CDs, but this is a different story.
>
> Yep, I recently had an dvd which didn't play on my notebook,
> couldn't read a single block :(
> Luckily I didn't buy it. 
>
> In these days you have to be *really* careful what to buy.
>
> BTW: a friend of mine is lawyer and music producer. I'm trying
> to convince him to admonish those companies which intentionally
> sell broken products ... would be nice if he'd really do this :)
> Joerg, do you feel confident enough in the area to provide a 
> expertise which could stand in court ?

I tries to do this via the "Verbraucherzentrale" - they have not been
interested. 

You first need to check whether you may sue someone at all if you are not 
the "Verbraucherzentrale". What you may do is to forbid mixing these non-CDs
with standard compliant media in the same rack in a shop and you may force the 
shops to add hints that "the rack to the left" does not include CDs.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Aaron Clark <ophidian@ophidian.homeip.net> wrote:

> For those still searching for background on this topic to try and  
> understand the effects and discussions of the GPL vs CDDL licensing in  
> other distros and how this may affect your use on Gentoo, you may find  
> the respective articles on wikipedia instructive.  Don't just read the  
> brief blurbs included in Wikipedia, but take a look at the citations  
> included in the articles as well.  I'm not sure it gives all sides of  
> the discussion, but it should be illuminating on some of the  
> background details that people were requesting.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cdrtools#Licensing_change
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cdrkit#Fork
>
> Aaron
>
> P.S. I'm fully aware that the text of the wiki articles may be  
> considered biased, that's a topic to take up on Wikipedia and not  
> here.  I'm just using the articles as a jumping point to what appear  
> to be primary sources so people can draw their own conclusions.

Have you been able to find that the people around cdrkit try to tell
people that if I do something it is illegal while the same thing is legal when 
they do it?

If you did not find this, then wikipedia does not seem to be a helful source for
information.


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> 
> > * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
> >
> > > First, libcdio had an illegal license change: the "authors" took a lot of the
> > > code from cdrtools and claim that "their" code (e.g. derived from cdda2wav) is 
> > > GPLv2-or-any-later. Well, not a single file from cdda2wav has ever been released
> > > under this license.
> >
> > Ah, then you as the original author (right ?) to stop them from 
> > that copyright infringenment. In the end they, IMHO, have two options:
> >
> > a) remove/replace your code
> > b) release libcdio under your terms (CDDL ?)
> 
> I am not the person who did put the code together as "libcdio". This was the 
> FSF. We are talking about a Copyright violation done by the FSF.

This is what I said. If they broke the license, they have to fix this.

> > ACK. That's one of those points why I thing, libraries should LGPL 
> > instead of GPL (I admit, I'm as careful as I should be about that w/
> > some of my own packages yet, but just due lack of time - on request
> > my GPL'ed libs will be moved to LGPL)
> 
> The FSF has no choice to make the code LGPL, converting from GPLv2-only is 
> already more than they are allowed to do.

Probably not the FSF, but all the authors involved. Can be a tricky issue ;-P
Yet another reason why I prefer to keep packages small.

> > BUT: please, please no flamewar about license philosophies.
> 
> I am not interested in license wars. I get the impression that some people 
> start flamewars because I am relaxed about licenses and do not try to make a 
> religion out of a license.

Well, just make one qualified statement at the right places and then 
better ignore the trolls. They just waste our time.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> > BTW: a friend of mine is lawyer and music producer. I'm trying
> > to convince him to admonish those companies which intentionally
> > sell broken products ... would be nice if he'd really do this :)
> > Joerg, do you feel confident enough in the area to provide a 
> > expertise which could stand in court ?
> 
> I tries to do this via the "Verbraucherzentrale" - they have not been
> interested. 

Did you expect something useful from them as long as they're
ruled by trolls like Seehofer ?  ;-P

> You first need to check whether you may sue someone at all if you are 
> not the "Verbraucherzentrale". 

Well, depends on from which side you want to attack:
a) competition law violation:  you have to be a competitor or represent
   an reasonably large part of the market to be alled to file a suite. 
b) they've sold a defective product, and so you're going to hold them
   responsible for compensation
c) you see this as an defraud and press criminal charges.

> What you may do is to forbid mixing these non-CDs with standard compliant 
> media in the same rack in a shop and you may force the shops to add hints 
> that "the rack to the left" does not include CDs.

Yep, that would be the shop's resposibility, followed on the consumer
protection law. Another side is directly attacking the producer.


BUT: for now we have *far more critical* problems in our country.
Our goverment is obviously guilty of high treason, not just by 
"EU constitution"/Lissabon contract.
In Bavaria, they even go that far to directly ignore an recent
contitutional court decision and legalize terroristic attacks 
by officials. Soon we're at the point where the basic right for 
violent resistent becomes active ...


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> > cdd2wav is directly writing to the audio device ? 
> > IMHO not good idea: you're bound to the devices cdda2wav supports,
> > requires it to be ported to each single audio interface you want
> > to use (not just platform specifics, but also things like audio
> > servers, clients which want non-standard config, ... ):(
> 
> I recomment you to read the cdda2wav man page to understand how it is working.

It just says that it echoes the data to /dev/dsp (or another given
device). So it's bound to exactly that device interface :(


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> > You first need to check whether you may sue someone at all if you are 
> > not the "Verbraucherzentrale". 
>
> Well, depends on from which side you want to attack:
> a) competition law violation:  you have to be a competitor or represent
>    an reasonably large part of the market to be alled to file a suite. 
> b) they've sold a defective product, and so you're going to hold them
>    responsible for compensation
> c) you see this as an defraud and press criminal charges.

OK, I forgot that you might have contact to a competitor. In this case, it 
should be possible to force shops to clearly separate the selling point for 
non-standard products from the products that behave as expected.


> > What you may do is to forbid mixing these non-CDs with standard compliant 
> > media in the same rack in a shop and you may force the shops to add hints 
> > that "the rack to the left" does not include CDs.
>
> Yep, that would be the shop's resposibility, followed on the consumer
> protection law. Another side is directly attacking the producer.

I am no sure whether you may directly attack the producer, but I would asume 
that you could forbid the producer to advertize these defective products as if 
they were CDs. I expect this will result in some micro-text: "This product is 
not a CD, we thus cannot grant that it is playable in a CD player" on all ads.


Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > > cdd2wav is directly writing to the audio device ? 
> > > IMHO not good idea: you're bound to the devices cdda2wav supports,
> > > requires it to be ported to each single audio interface you want
> > > to use (not just platform specifics, but also things like audio
> > > servers, clients which want non-standard config, ... ):(
> > 
> > I recomment you to read the cdda2wav man page to understand how it is working.
>
> It just says that it echoes the data to /dev/dsp (or another given
> device). So it's bound to exactly that device interface :(

Well, if you did read the man paghe, you know that cdda2wav knows the correct 
names for all supported platforms and in addition allows to define the name
by use of an option.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[John covici]

on Friday 07/04/2008 Joerg Schilling(Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de) wrote
 > Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
 > 
 > > * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
 > >
 > > > > cdd2wav is directly writing to the audio device ? 
 > > > > IMHO not good idea: you're bound to the devices cdda2wav supports,
 > > > > requires it to be ported to each single audio interface you want
 > > > > to use (not just platform specifics, but also things like audio
 > > > > servers, clients which want non-standard config, ... ):(
 > > > 
 > > > I recomment you to read the cdda2wav man page to understand how it is working.
 > >
 > > It just says that it echoes the data to /dev/dsp (or another given
 > > device). So it's bound to exactly that device interface :(
 > 
 > Well, if you did read the man paghe, you know that cdda2wav knows the correct 
 > names for all supported platforms and in addition allows to define the name
 > by use of an option.

Not sure who is maintaining cdrtools for gentoo, but any chance of
getting alpha44 into the gentoo repository?

One thing I did discover about my original problem where cdcd would
not work is that it is using libcdaudio which uses some ioctl to play cd
frames which I am not sure what it is doing, but does not appear to be
copying to /dev/dsp -- can anyone tell me about this ioctl and how it
works?  The actual line of code that I see is: if(ioctl(cd_desc,
CDAUDIO_PLAY_MSF, &cdmsf) < 0) .


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Daniel Pielmeier]

2008/7/4, John covici <covici@ccs.covici.com>:
>
> Not sure who is maintaining cdrtools for gentoo, but any chance of
> getting alpha44 into the gentoo repository?

According to ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/
cdrtools-2.01.01a42 is the latest version and cdrtools-2.01.01a41 is
in the tree. If you want this new version you can file a version bump
request. Or just rename the ebuild and put it in an overlay as i guess
not much has changed concerning the in installing procedure of
cdrtools between this two versions.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> > It just says that it echoes the data to /dev/dsp (or another given
> > device). So it's bound to exactly that device interface :(
> 
> Well, if you did read the man paghe, you know that cdda2wav knows 
> the correct names for all supported platforms and in addition 
> allows to define the name by use of an option.

Maybe we're talking about different versions. Mine doesn't 
state this ...

But still the problem remains: you need explicit support for
each audio interface you want to use.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:

> OK, I forgot that you might have contact to a competitor. In this case, it 
> should be possible to force shops to clearly separate the selling point for 
> non-standard products from the products that behave as expected.

Yep, my advocate is also music producer, so he can do this :)

> > Yep, that would be the shop's resposibility, followed on the consumer
> > protection law. Another side is directly attacking the producer.
> 
> I am no sure whether you may directly attack the producer, but I would asume 
> that you could forbid the producer to advertize these defective products as if 
> they were CDs. I expect this will result in some micro-text: "This product is 
> not a CD, we thus cannot grant that it is playable in a CD player" on all ads.

Well, that would be at least a good step. The main point is that
we've have to get managed that these products may not be traded
as they now are in our country. So either producer or importer
have to react on that.

Imagine the big news @heise if we'd such a case ;)


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] CD ROM does not play audio CD's

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > > It just says that it echoes the data to /dev/dsp (or another given
> > > device). So it's bound to exactly that device interface :(
> > 
> > Well, if you did read the man paghe, you know that cdda2wav knows 
> > the correct names for all supported platforms and in addition 
> > allows to define the name by use of an option.
>
> Maybe we're talking about different versions. Mine doesn't 
> state this ...

Are you using "cdrkit" instead of the original?

The text is in the man page since September 2007.


> But still the problem remains: you need explicit support for
> each audio interface you want to use.

Which is no problem. This is code that has been verified to work on all
known platforms since 1998 ;-)

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: intentionally broken media

[Joerg Schilling]

Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> * Joerg Schilling <Joerg.Schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de> wrote:
>
> > OK, I forgot that you might have contact to a competitor. In this case, it 
> > should be possible to force shops to clearly separate the selling point for 
> > non-standard products from the products that behave as expected.
>
> Yep, my advocate is also music producer, so he can do this :)

Then you may think about another interesting case:

I am not sure about today, but a few years ago, Sony did definitely do 
something real strange:

They sold CDs that flip the copy control bit in the subchannel data with a 
frequency of 9.375 Hz. This is an indication for:

"The creator of this copy is not the copyright holder".

So Sony sold something illegal. ..... Well, they did this in order to prevent
home stereeo appliances from allowing copies if the disk, but the SCM is 
intended to mark home made copies.

Sony did sell media that contain a marker for "Sony does not own the copyright
on this media".

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
       js@cs.tu-berlin.de                (uni)  
       schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de     (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list