James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joerg Schilling writes:
> > > Well we will just have to disagree on that, for me cdrw(1) is very
> > > simple and its list of options is just right
> > > for me; even though I hardly use any of them.
> >
> > For me cdrw is very non-intuitive. Cdrecord on the other side works
> > completely
> > intuitive and it does not need the non-intuitive options you need with cdrw.
>
> Count me among the folks who don't agree.
>
> The fact that "dev=1,0,0" seems to mean the same thing as
> /dev/dsk/c1t0d0p0 is perhaps intuitive if you understand the inner
> structure, but why should I have to? Why shouldn't "dev=c1t0d0p0"
> just work as expected?
You are trying to make things more complx than they are....
in contrary to cdrw, cdrecord allows you to do a lot of things in a simple way.
e.g. calling
cdrecord dev=cdrom file.iso
But note that this is an alias where cdrecord (in reality libscg) depends on
what it gets from vold.
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
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
