Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Joerg Schilling ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060707 00:50]: > > You are running the Linux alpha kernel series (2.6). In this alpha software > > series, frequent unannounced incompatible interface changes are common. > > Perhaps you want to realize that 2.6 is the default kernel series. Or > don't you care about users?
The problem is that the Linux kernel developers do not care about users. Linux-2.4 is the latest stable Linux kernel series. During the past 2 years, Linux-2.6 did introduce 4 incompatible interface changes that did break the userland program cdrecord. Introducing this kind of changes verifies the fact that the Linux-2.6 series is alpha. > > >/usr/bin/cdrecord: Warning: using inofficial version of libscg > > >(debian-0.8debian2 '@(#)scsitransp.c 1.91 04/06/17 Copyright > > >1988,1995,2000-2004 J. Schilling'). > > > > This indicates that you are not using an official version of cdrecord but > > a version that has been bastardized by Debian and that implements bugs that > > are not present in the original. > > This is next to slander. I consider legal action now. I get the impression that you confuse proven facts by slander. Just have a look at the Debian bug tracking system to learn how many bugs Debian did introduce into their version of cdrtools. Just test the original version of cdrecord to verify that these bugs are not present in the original version. > > I recommend to just use the original from: > > > > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha/ > > > > It is true and (opensource.org aproved) free Opensource Software > > Opensource just means that the source is available. However, Debian No, you seem to be uninformed, see: http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php > requires software to be free, that especially means that anybody could The definition of free is a bit unclear, this is why Bruce Perens did write a definition (see http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php and http://www.debian.org/social_contract). > take the software and make appropriate changes to that. Looking at your > answers above, you don't seem to have that intention for cdrecord, and > your disruptive and deconstructive way is AFAICS the reason why cdrecord > couldn't be updated in Debian so far. Cdrecord is true OpenSource _and_ cares about the demands of the users. Debian makes changes but does not cooperate with the original author and introduces bugs that could be avoided if the original author would have been asked before. In addition, Debian stopped upgrading cdrtools 14 months ago.... This does not look like a user friendly act. I am still in hope that Debian is not turning into an unfree project and that the Debian maintainers learn about the definitions of true OpenSource and cooperation. I am always open to fruitful discussions but I dislike projects that mar the reputation of OSS authors. Note that distributions like Debian depend on the OSS authors and if distributions peeve the OSS authors, they are going to kill what they are based on. Also note that I am not the only OSS author that is unhappy with the way Debian acts recently, the Apache project reports about very similar problems with Debian. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
