dvdrtools-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Dvdrtools-users] Re: Problem burning to LG DVDRAM GSA-4167B -- ProDVD o


From: Bryan J. Smith
Subject: [Dvdrtools-users] Re: Problem burning to LG DVDRAM GSA-4167B -- ProDVD only does DVD-R
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 11:55:36 -0500

On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 23:28 +1300, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
> This just means you can't use dvdrecord.
> Why? Both Jörg's cdrecord-prodvd and growisofs are expected to burn
> disk images to DVD+R, on any burner which can burn DVD+R (which these
> days means pretty much all).

You are, once again, mistaken on Jorg's CDRecord-ProDVD.

You have to use a block access approach for DVD+R.  Jorg has added this
in 2.01a11+, but for _only_ for Ricoh firmware.  I don't think
Sony/Philips designs are supported (yet?).  I'd be interested to find
out what Ricoh is doing differently (translation of Matsushita/Pioneer
to Sony/Philips commands?).

Previously, Jorg only added DVD+RW drive firmware support to record DVD-
R (and DVD-RW in "record" emulation), and not DVD+R (or DVD+RW for that
matter) itself.  That's because, as I've detailed many times, DVD+R is
not like DVD-R.  Jorg's release notes talk about that.

Also know that DVD-RW is physically different than DVD-R as well.
Although you can "emulated" a recording to a DVD-RW (just like CD-RW),
it is _not_ recommended, and a real DVD-R (just like CD-R) should be
used.

DVD+R is already half-way there -- as Jorg says ...

  "A DVD+R is written in a mode something between TAO and packet
   writing mode."

There are similar limitations/issues to any device that can only be
written in block mode.  DVD-R can be written in either, just like CD-R.

> Eg growisofs -Z /dev/dvdrecorder=dvd.iso must
> work, if it doesn't, "get DVD-R" is at best a workaround if the bug
> can't be fixed, but not an answer.
> Did you try with a 4.7G DVD+R(W), to eliminate the dual-layer factor?

Also remember that 4.7GB (GB=10^9) is only 4.35GiB (GiB=2^30).

Most OS utilities report GB using base 2, not base 10, so they are
really reporting GiB.

The "Xi" (metric-binary) were only recently standardized by the IEEE
and, I believe now, ISO.  Newer OS software/utilities are starting to
use the nomenclature as the base 2 and base 10 prefixes vary by a great
amount.

E.g., 1TiB = 1.1TB -- ~10% difference, quite significant, and it's only
getting greater with greater numbers.

-- 
Bryan J. Smith   mailto:address@hidden
http://thebs413.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------
Some things (or athletes) money can't buy.
For everything else there's "ManningCard."






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]