Artem Kachitchkine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > But the second approach is based on the wrong asumption that UDF is always
> > the
> > best choice.
>
> Yes, it's a tradeoff. I know, it's a foreign concept over here, but
> sometimes things have to be done that way in the competitive,
> resource-limited environment. If the wrong assumption is consistent with
> any other major OS on the planet, it's the right assumption in the eyes
> of a casual user, which is the kind of person the default behavior is
> designed for. For the expert minority, some handles can be provided.
Well, today we know about the problem:
- UDF limits file size to ~200 GB while ISO-9660 allows files up to
8 TB.
- When in 2-3 years otical media > 200 GB becomes available, mkisofs
will create hybrid filesystems that include the bigger files only in
the ISO-9660 part but not in the UDF part.
This has not been forseen 10 years ago when UDF was created.
What will happen in 2-3 years when the problem hits again?
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]
