On Sun, Oct 21, 2001 at 01:56:06PM +0200, you [Joerg Schilling] claimed: > > >Hmm. It used to work with 2.2-kernel. With too large image, it just gave an > >error. > > I may only judge from information you provide, not from information you hide.
I did say that in the original report: "It used to give a nice error when disk size was exceeded with 2.2.18pre19 and a tad older cdrecord..." but I could have been clearer. > 1.10 is outdated too, please read > > >http://www.fokus.gmd.de/research/cc/glone/employees/joerg.schilling/private/problems.html Ok. I'll compile the newest from source. But do you think the too-large-image lock up might be cured with a newer cdrecord, or should is the kernel the prime suspect? I will try anyway and report back to you. > >with 2.2 ("failed to mmap /dev/null" or something) so I went back to 1.9. I > > I cannot prevent you from broken Linux installations! > > The linux kernel people still have propblems with interfaces and make > thanges that break binary compatibility when going to more recent Linux > versions. Why do you believe that a cdrecord that has been compiled on 2.4 > will run on 2.2? Well, most software software seems to work with both 2.2 and 2.4. I didn't think carefully enough to realize that some interfaces must have changed. > Linux needed close to 10 years to finally support mmap() (ther OS like > SunOS did this since 1987). Cdrecord's outoconf chooses the best > interfaces of the OS. SVS shared mem is outdated and badly implemented on > Linux (too many restrictions). mmap is the modern method to get shared > memory but Linux didn't support is before November 2000. I see. Thanks for the clarification. -- v -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
