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

[Baho Utot]

Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Heiko Baums <lists at baums-on-web.de> wrote:
>
>   
>> I mean I assume that you have a big technical knowledge. Otherwise you
>> wouldn't be able to write such a program and build such an Open Solaris
>> LiveCD. But I also can understand that some people feel being attacked
>> by you. On the other hand I can understand that you like to see
>> cdrtools in the repo instead of cdrkit since it is your and the
>> original software. And I'd also vote for switching from cdrkit to
>> cdrtools in the repos even if I generally don't mind with which program
>> I burn my CDs as long as the CDs are burned correctly.
>>     
>
> It seems that you also use this discussion to attack me.
>
> It would help a lot of you first try to understand what happened. A person
> did make a claim about an alleged problem without giving any proof for his 
> claims. I asked him kindly to give enough information so in case there really 
> was a problem, I am able to explain where it is located.
>
> Jörg
>
>   

I don't think you "get it".

First of all, I don't care what happened when the split or fork 
happened.  It makes _ZERO_ difference to me.

This is what I have done because of _your_ direct actions on this list 
and other actions by you on some news groups I read.

On the computers I have that run Slackware -12.2/13.0 I have removed 
cdrtools and installed cdrkit.
Note that Slackware distributes cdrtools.

I don't care if cdrtools is better than the very best or that cdrkit is 
worst than the worst. It doesn't matter.

I have preformed some tests and guess what cdrkit works!  Imagine that.
It burnt the iso's for Slackware distribution, and using md5sum to sum 
both a Slackware distribution disk burned by both cdrkit and cdrtools 
and they are the same, how did that happen?

Going forward I will use cdrkit on any system that I have any 
responsibilities on.

Thanks.

PS.  I agree and support Arch Linux to distribute cdrkit.