From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 24 02:02:56 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A8E16A4CE for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 02:02:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from S2.cableone.net (smtp2.cableone.net [24.116.0.228]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3191943D48 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2005 02:02:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from v.velox@vvelox.net) Received: from vixen42.local.lan (unverified [24.119.71.105]) by S2.cableone.net (CableOne SMTP Service S2) with ESMTP id 14298468 for multiple; Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:18:56 -0700 Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:01:51 -0600 From: Vulpes Velox To: Christopher Nehren Message-ID: <20050323200151.7d911068@vixen42.local.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20050322071722.038787d0@mail.qconline.com> <20050322120017.6E90816A4EC@hub.freebsd.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20050322071722.038787d0@mail.qconline.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20050322121618.01ddbef8@mail.qconline.com> <20050322184915.2656cde1@vixen42.local.lan> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 1.0.1 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 4, First 12, in=14, out=0, spam=0 X-External-IP: 24.119.71.105 X-Abuse-Info: Send abuse complaints to abuse@cableone.net cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ATAPICAM? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 02:02:56 -0000 On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 01:16:55 +0000 (UTC) Christopher Nehren wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 2005-03-23, Vulpes Velox scribbled these > curious markings: > > Burncd, for CDs, works nicely. And with out the useless bloat of > > several of the CD programs. The big problem is the lack of a > > useful atapi dvd burning program. > > And the fact that burncd only supports a relatively small amount of > hardware. What's so bloated about cdrecord? Never had any problem with any hardware not listed as officially working. More of meant that in regards various front ends to cdrecord. But that program is a pita to work with compared to burncd.