On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Mario Đanić <[email protected]> wrote:
> > And at the same time, where folks want strict compliance for any given > > standard they can get that too by using the specific library desired. > > > > Sigh, that sounds like a bunch of libraries. I don't see that the *number* part is a problem. Right now on my ubuntu computer in /usr/lib I have 351 shared libraries (.so's). And if I do a "ldd xine" I come up with 41. If the numbers were 355 or 45 that wouldn't bother me at all. Applications only need to use those libraries that are desired. The author of the application is in a better position that me or libcdio to know how much generality and compliance is desired. It sounds like you wants to create a single all-encompasing library that has might have loose compliance with anything but is very practical and can do everything folks are likely to want to do in optical media, then that's the one library your burning application might access. On the other hand, suppose you are doing something strictly of a CD nature and say only care about Red-Book CDs. Then although one could use the everything hybrid library, I think I would tend to use the libcdio library. If nothing else it would be stricter about ensuring that you come up with a valid CD because that's all it *could* do. >From my position, optical > media recording scene is fragmented enough as-is, and one of the > reasons behind Libburnia project is to unify efforts on "burning" > matters on Linux, and then possibly other platforms. > So again, I think what you want is this hybrid loose compliance library for burning. And the best way to make sure it happens is to "vote with your feet" or do it. So I'm just suggesting doing this separate from libcdio *library* which was intended for CDs. (It is open for discussion as to whether you want to do this inside the libcdio *project* or outside. If there are internal parts of libcdio that should be moved outside to help things along, that's okay. We've discussed for example moving MMC outside by turning it into a library which libcdio and perhaps libburnia use) Personally I think doing this makes things much cleaner and easier to work on. There is no backward compatibility to worry about. Furthermore one can reassess any of the assumptions made in a more fundamental and radical way. > > Please excuse me for not participating enough in the discussions that > are taking place lately on this list, but unfortunately I am without a > computer as it is in the process of being repaired (for almost 4 weeks > now, sigh), and have very sporadic access to one. > Sorry to hear. > > I will try to get up to speed as soon as my laptop is back, and in the > mean time I'll read your discussions as I can. > I look forward to your thoughts and views. Thanks in advance for any help you can give. Quite frankly I do not consider myself an expert any of the things libcdio purports to understand. As I wrote in the history section of libcdio documentation, this started as my own personal and individual discomfort with DMCA. > Cheers, > Mario > > >
