Proposal: cdrkit vs. cdrtools

Thilo Six T.Six at gmx.de
Sun Jan 13 16:29:03 UTC 2008


Stephan Hermann wrote the following on 13.01.2008 15:17

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

[quote]
For Ubuntu, cdrtools is in multiverse...
[/quote]

according to packages.ubuntu.com cdrtools isn´t in the archive since edgy and
even in edgy it is only a transitional package only iirc.


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

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

Seems to work fine because, as you say, the cdrkit binaries take the same
options, and using symlinks saves on patching all the other applications
depending on cdrtools.
[/quote]

in the light of the above i think this is the easiest way.


-- 
bye Thilo

key: 0x4A411E09





More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list