cdrkit isoinfo and iso-info

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 07/28/2009 02:24 AM, Bill Davidsen wrote:

> Not including cdrecord is a valid choice. Putting another program with
> the same name and different code in seems pretty sleazy. 

This is hardly a unique thing to do. It is done for compatibility
reasons. Remember that wodim is command line compatible equivalent and
end users don't have to care.

It results in
> people sending Joerg questions and complaints (please don't pretend that
> the disclamer most people never see prevents this), and gives people who
> want to use the cli to burn media the false feeling that cdrecord is
> installed, when it's a hacked, obsolete version.

cdrkit is hardly a "hacked,obsolete" version. You seem biased against it
for some reason. Is the notion that cdrecord author will be burdened by
questions a actual problem or perceived one? I suspect that one is just
made up.

> How hard can it be to convert applications from cdrerord to totem? You
> don't even absolutely need source, IIRC you can edit the binary to
> change "cdrecord" to "usetotem" in the data section.

What does totem have to do with cdrecord? If you mean cdrkit, the
applications in the repository already do the fall back dance. However
it is helpful to maintain symlinks for legacy compatibility and for end
users.

Rahul