Major advance in Bluray multisession effort.

Discuss anything specific to using Puppy on a multi-session disk
Message
Author
User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#21 Post by Ted Dog »

jamesbond wrote:Ted Dog, does it still work if you change iso-level to 4 instead of 3?
can not find info on level 4 with iso9660 :oops:

is level 4 ISO13490/ECMA-168?

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#22 Post by jamesbond »

Ted Dog wrote:
jamesbond wrote:Ted Dog, does it still work if you change iso-level to 4 instead of 3?
can not find info on level 4 with iso9660 :oops:

is level 4 ISO13490/ECMA-168?
No, when you use the iso-level setting of "4", mkisofs actually use iso9660:1999 specification. This is the "supposedly" proper way to use -D (ref: http://linux.die.net/man/8/mkisofs). I can confirm that if you use this setting, the disc is readable fine under Windows XP. The question is whether it can still burn > 4GB files and whether there are any specific bluray stuff that fails.

I've tested removing the -J (change it to -D) and changing iso-level to 4 for all the 3 possible places:
- save multisession
- remaster
- iso builder
and I have tested saving session under these conditions, it seems to work fine.
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#23 Post by Ted Dog »

Growisofs has a calculation bug that effects multisession being written somewhere near the 10G mark.
This is not a limit on these settings, to prove that I added files to a directory inside the directory holding the files needed to boot FatDog64 those added files totaled 22G with one over 10G in size.

Of course I had to use a USB harddrive, not build from RAM for that test.

This is my method of backing up large stuff, Organize files into directories to 22G limit. by moving stuff rather than copying.

jamesbond
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007, 05:02
Location: The Blue Marble

#24 Post by jamesbond »

I see. So does using iso-level setting of "4" instead of "3" still work? Because like you say above, it seems that the only thing that needs to be changed is:
a) drop -J
b) add -D
I've done both a) and b), but in addition to that I'm changing iso-level from "3" to "4", so I wonder whether it still work? The manpage doesn't exactly say that iso9660:1999 relaxes the size restriction of earlier iso9660 spec (which "iso-level 3" does).

As for why it doesn't work for others puppies (including earlier Fatdogs), is probably because in 620 we now use the latest cdrtools (earlier Fatdogs uses cdrkit - a fork of cdrtools which seems to be no longer updated after 2010). I think many puppies (with the exception of Slacko) perhaps still use cdrkit.

cheers!
Fatdog64 forum links: [url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=117546]Latest version[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/ke8sn5H]Contributed packages[/url] | [url=https://cutt.ly/se8scrb]ISO builder[/url]

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#25 Post by Ted Dog »

@jamesbond,
Thanks for clearing that up for me, level 4 is a modified version of level2 with changes to support nested directories beyond the level 2 native support.

As a level 2, I doubt that the 4G boundaries are leaped. However easy enough to test.

Weather has cleared up nicely, but my grass has shot-up overnight, I see mowing in the next few days. :x

Thanks for the heads up on why fatdog64 works and other puppies don't

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#26 Post by Ted Dog »

@jamesbond

Would you rewrite this line and the other to send warnings and error msgs to /tmp for debugging ms issues in the future.

Code: Select all

	! $GROWISOFS -root $archivepath "$SAVEFILE_MOUNT"/archive/* > /dev/null && save_ok=no	

code snippit from /usr/sbin/fatdog-save-multisession.sh

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#27 Post by Flash »

Ted, is there any chance that Fatdog64-611-SeaMonkey will work instead of Fatdog64-620? I already have the iso and I prefer SeaMonkey to Firefox.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#28 Post by Ted Dog »

Flash wrote:Ted, is there any chance that Fatdog64-611-SeaMonkey will work instead of Fatdog64-620? I already have the iso and I prefer SeaMonkey to Firefox.
see
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 749#700749

Does not look like it, plus v620 is a rock solid release worthy of the bandwidth used :wink: I have to say its the BEST puppy in any form/spin in the last 18 months. :shock:

And it has SeaMonkey :D

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#29 Post by Flash »

Oh, okay, thanks. I'm downloading 620 now. :)

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#30 Post by rcrsn51 »

jamesbond wrote:No, when you use the iso-level setting of "4", mkisofs actually use iso9660:1999 specification. This is the "supposedly" proper way to use -D (ref: http://linux.die.net/man/8/mkisofs). I can confirm that if you use this setting, the disc is readable fine under Windows XP.
I can also confirm that "-D -iso-level 4" is a replacement for "-J" in XP and Win7. This is both when writing directly to a data DVD and making an ISO to burn data onto a CD.

This argument throws a warning message about filenames longer than 31 characters, but it doesn't appear to be a problem.

I didn't look at any bootable disc / multi-session scenarios.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#31 Post by Ted Dog »

Tried tests most likely to fail and iso-level 4 change just throws more volume change warnings, but adding sessions over the DVD sized works. File size reporting looks correct, checking for large sized file truncation.
But so far no difference (slower boot possibly) using iso-level 4 over 3 except for warnings..

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#32 Post by Ted Dog »

Have not spotted any new issues using iso-level 4 over iso-level 3. Will burn some full sized BD-Rs since all tries with BD-RE did as well with iso-level 4. :D

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#33 Post by Flash »

Okay I downloaded Fatdog64-620, burned it onto a BD-RE with Burniso2cd and booted it with the first boot option (non-multisession). I see what you mean by the humongous initrd, it must have taken several minutes to load. :shock: But overall loading time doesn't seem to be much longer than it was for the multisession Slacko DVD I was using before.

I installed Flashblock because the ad in the upper right corner of the forum is so obnoxious. Other than that, Fatdog seems to be well-behaved.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#34 Post by Ted Dog »

All tests with iso-level 4 have the same results as iso-level 3 (different WARNINGS, and ISO size shown, but no actual change in useable size.) So If iso-level 4 allows better compatibility with other O/Ss lets go with it.

Can't do any more testing until another 50 pkg of Bluray media is delivered.. :lol:

Will be working on identified growisofs issues, while I wait.

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#35 Post by Flash »

Ted, why don't you get one or two BD-RE disks for experimenting with? I got some Kodak ones from Fry's for about $4 each. They work fine with the burning applications in Puppy. They even have some kind of "hard coat" supposed to make them more scratch resistant.

User avatar
zigbert
Posts: 6621
Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006, 18:13
Location: Valåmoen, Norway
Contact:

#36 Post by zigbert »

I don't get all your talk, so let me ask...

As I understand it. setting isolevel to 4 (and removing -J) would improve the pBurn execution to be compatible with recent windows.

1.) Will it be compatible with windows 7/8 as well as XP?
2.) Are there any reasons for using isolevel 3?
3.) Does this allow burning files over 4Gb?
4.) If so, could this replace UDF?


Thank you
Sigmund

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#37 Post by Ted Dog »

zigbert wrote:I don't get all your talk, so let me ask...

As I understand it. setting isolevel to 4 (and removing -J) would improve the pBurn execution to be compatible with recent windows.

1.) Will it be compatible with windows 7/8 as well as XP?
2.) Are there any reasons for using isolevel 3?
3.) Does this allow burning files over 4Gb?
4.) If so, could this replace UDF?


Thank you
Sigmund
Yes to all.

Q#2 on isolevel 3, isolevel 3 relaxes just about everything on the standards.
isolevel 4 does not exist officially, The isolevel 4 is a command switch which writes a 'better version of iso-level 2' its the use of iso-level 2 that allows compatibility with most non-linux OSs.

UDF multisession is a no-go with linux tools, but running imgburn.exe with wine on linux can produce the levels of UDF needed for making BluRay video discs that play in the picky (PS3) bluray players.

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#38 Post by Ted Dog »

Flash wrote:Ted, why don't you get one or two BD-RE disks for experimenting with? I got some Kodak ones from Fry's for about $4 each. They work fine with the burning applications in Puppy. They even have some kind of "hard coat" supposed to make them more scratch resistant.
Oh I got those too, but progress on the testing of iso-level was well matched up with BD-RE and some BD-R needed to be used to finish up my 134 test cases... :lol: I did not try them all, 7 test cases are the most likely to fail. Also needed to backup a 400G HD and was running short. BD-RE takes about 30 mins longer than BD-R so for 'nearly full' disc tests, a few BD-R's are used. I get mine in bulk at 70cents each. (a G of storage for 3cents)

User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

#39 Post by Flash »

Well come on, where do you get them so cheap?

User avatar
Ted Dog
Posts: 3965
Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2005, 02:35
Location: Heart of Texas

#40 Post by Ted Dog »


Post Reply