[arch-general] An old, tiresome discussion: cdrtools vs cdrkit

Joerg Schilling Joerg.Schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de
Wed Jan 27 05:02:09 EST 2010


Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:

> The only thing that will definitely change our minds with regards to 
> this is actually seeing a copy of the report saying the linking 
> performed with cdrtools is not an issue due to license restrictions. 
> Until that time, this discussion is going nowhere and makes you appear 
> trollish with your replies.

I am sorry to see you again trolling :-(

Other people in this mailing list have been able to send useful discussion
contributions but you seem to insist in legal nonsense.

There was nothing but a social attack from a hostile person. Please show me a 
report from a single lawyer that proves that there is a legal problem with the 
original software. Plese do not point me to the FSF Web site, it was not made 
by a lawyer, it is not secific to cdrtools and I even have a private mail from 
Eben Moglen that is is made with general incorrect claims regarding the GPL on 
it. I don't know in what legal system you are living but in the legal system I 
live, you are just supporting a hostile person that is doing libel attacks 
against OSS. Why do you support this hostile downstream? He is not even doing 
any "work" anymore since May 6th 2007.

As long as you ignore legal principles, a discussion with you will lead us to 
nowhere.

> Maybe we will move to GNU mkisofs/isofsmk as development appears to have 
> started there  (I can troll too...).

It seems that you are childish. 

First note that since more than 11 years, I am the official mkisofs maintainer. 
For this reason, other entities cannot legally use the name "mkisofs". 

Second: some funny people did take a mkisofs source from early 1999 that is 
missing all important features and that is full of bugs. Given the fact that
Debian was not able to find people to support their fork, do you really believe 
that RMS will find someone? The person who started to work on this outdated 
source already came up with a lot of wrong claims. Let me explain reality...

mkisofs-1.212b5 misses:

-	support for large files 

-	working Rock Ridge Support

-	ISO-9660:1999 support

-	UTF-8 support

-	Any file name coding abstraction support

-	Working Eltorito boot support

-	Boot support for various other platforms (i.e. Sparc)

-	Support for Apple extensions via HFS

-	UDF support

-	Built in find(1) support (made in mkisofs via libfind).

-	....

It however creates ISO images with lots of structural bugs.

The current mkisofs is 5x as much as software you got in early 1999.

If you like to live in the past, congratulations!

I have seen a lot of encouraging mails from other people. I hope that Arch 
Linux will finally come back to OSS principles.

Jörg

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


More information about the arch-general mailing list