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

[Armando M. Baratti]

On 30-01-2010 12:58, Baho Utot wrote:
> 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.
>
>
>
Strange, I have had the opposite experience.
Trying to burn some CDs with cdrkit (on CentOS) give some problem with 
not being able to generate Joliet system and I have had trouble with 
utf-8 too.

First I thought I was making some stupid mistake, but changing to 
cdrtools (from sourceforge repository) fixed that.

Well, it was in another distro, but by what I've read in this thread it 
seems to make sense now.


Armando