[openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- From: "Ingo Weinhold" <bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeosstorage@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 19:28:36 +0100 CET
"Axel D=F6rfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Tyler Dauwalder <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> > > What concerns me more, is the CD-absolute addressing. Our ISO9660
> > > FS
> > > would need to recognize the CD as an ill-formatted one and use
> > > absolute
> > > addresses in this case, while for standard conformant ones the
> > > correct
> > > addressing would be used. I think, that should be feasible at
> > > least.
> > Well, as best I can tell, the one I'm using currently has no
> > problem
> > with any of the CDs I've thrown at it (though I haven't tested
> > exhaustively), and I thought we got that one for free, as it comes
> > in
> > the R5 sample code.
>
> Well, the one that comes with R5 just don't support multi-session
> disks
> at all. And I *know* from the one I've written,
Man, you did indeed write a multisession ISO9660 FS! I thought that was
a joke of yours, recently! :-P :-)
This guy is always good for a surprise. :-))
> that it has some
> problems with some CDs - I happen to own such a thing :-)
> (the AmigaOS 3.9 CD, if somebody cares :-))
Have you analyzed the problem=3F
I bet, it's just another unforeseeable standard deviation. Or even more
confusing, standard compliance. ;-)
CU, Ingo
- Follow-Ups:
- [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- From: Axel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=F6rfler
- References:
- [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- From: Axel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=F6rfler
Other related posts:
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- » [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- From: Axel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=F6rfler
- [openbeosstorage] Re: ISO9660/cdrom progress
- From: Axel =?iso-8859-1?q?D=F6rfler