| 1 |
Jason Stubbs schreef: |
| 2 |
> As I said, it doesn't seem like it's misinterpreting from the output |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Actually, it seems to me that it is, from the output: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> Track 01: 4444 of 4444 MB written (fifo 100%). Track 01: Total bytes |
| 7 |
> read/written: 4660250624/4660250624 (2275513 sectors). Writing time: |
| 8 |
> 101.814s Fixating... WARNING: Some drives don't like fixation in |
| 9 |
> dummy mode. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
The output definitely seems to indicate that cdrecord thinks that it is |
| 12 |
meant to be in dummy mode-- but this is probably not a |
| 13 |
'misinterpretation', since two people have already pointed out syntax |
| 14 |
errors that are probably stimulating cdrecord to resort to a fallback |
| 15 |
position (dummy mode, to avoid damage to the device or waste of media, |
| 16 |
since the program is not quite sure from the incorrect syntax precisely |
| 17 |
what you want it to do). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
But I very rarely use cdrecord from the command-line, so I'm just |
| 20 |
guessing, to take my mind off this awful cold I've got. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Holly |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives