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

#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 »


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

#41 Post by Flash »

Oh no, I just discovered that Verbatim make a 7.5 GB mini BD-RE for $17 (each!) and a mini BD-R for $8.

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

#42 Post by Ted Dog »

how about a tall stack of 50 mini's (DVDs)

http://www.amazon.com/Philips-Duplicato ... im_sbs_e_1

This is more temping... (plus I read online that someones wife made table lamps out of old cds.)

:roll:

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

#43 Post by jamesbond »

Thanks Ted Dog for the testing, and mainly for the great breakthrough! :D

I looked at the source of cdrtools and confirm that -iso-level 4 actually enables large files too (and a bunch of other things - mostly iso-level 3 settings). The source is used in 620 is here: ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha ... 13.tar.bz2 - I forgot to upload it to /source/c, but I already did now.
Ted Dog wrote:@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
Yes, I will see what I can do.
Zigbert wrote:I don't get all your talk, so let me ask...
Ted already answered this, but let me put it in a different way:
As I understand it. setting isolevel to 4 (and removing -J) would improve the pBurn execution to be compatible with recent windows.
You either choose -iso-level 4 or -J (but not both). As Ted has stated, "-J" is a broken M$ extension (or abomination) of Rockridge. It is required for long filenames to be seen under Win95 and Win98 (perhaps Win2K too - didn't check, didn't test). Starting on Windows XP, Windows can also see long filenames written under ISO9660:1999 directory which is what -iso-level 4 uses. So effectively -iso-level 4 replaces -J unless you want to be downward compatible to Win95/98 (shudder!)
1.) Will it be compatible with windows 7/8 as well as XP?
Yes on Win XP and Win7, doesn't own Win8 to test, but I don't see why not.
2.) Are there any reasons for using isolevel 3?
Mainly to enable writing large files (file bigger than 4 GB), which iso-level 4 also does.
3.) Does this allow burning files over 4Gb?
Yes, both iso-level 3 and iso-level 4 does
4.) If so, could this replace UDF?
Yes and No. If you want to burn DVD Video (or probably Bluray video too) - you need UDF. If all you care is data, then yes.

UDF also supports multi-session, but as myself and Ted Dog painstakingly found, Linux tools don't support UDF.
When you try to write multisession to an UDF disc, strange things happen: if you mount the disc as "-t iso9660", you will see the files added in the new session. If you mount the disc as "-t udf", you will *NOT* see the new files.
So until this is fixed, use of UDF and multisession is mutually exclusive - you choose one or another but not both.

Sigmund, of special note, all these experiments are done under cdrtools. I'm not sure how they fare under cdrkit, but according to Ted who has done a lot of test, cdrkit may not be up to task for this. I haven't done the test under cdrkit so I can't say but I'll side with Ted on this.

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

#44 Post by zigbert »

Thank you guys for all input.
I will let it all sink in for some time, to think it through before making an updated pBurn.

As I see it right now:
- Replace isolevel 3 with isolevel 4, and remove the Joilet options. Do we need the Rockridge ???? Remove udf as well.
- Keep isolevel 1 for backward compatibility
- Depend on cdrtools ONLY
- burning video, filesystem settings are not available for user, so not any issue with udf here...

This would make it all easier for the user (Less options).


Any opinions?
Sigmund

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

#45 Post by rcrsn51 »

zigbert wrote:Do we need the Rockridge ????
In my tests using "iso-level 4", I still need Rock Ridge to provide upper/lower case filenames, in Linux.

[Edit] Somehow, XP was able to see the full upper/lower case filenames. WITH iso-level 4 but WITHOUT Rock Ridge.
Last edited by rcrsn51 on Sat 04 May 2013, 22:06, edited 2 times in total.

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

#46 Post by Ted Dog »

I think we need some long name support as Rockridge would. UDF would not really be needed from a data point of view. I found that a windows free software runs under wine that will be a workaround if any one wants to make true video player UDF video with in puppy. - :wink:

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

#47 Post by Ted Dog »

ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha ... 13.tar.bz2

Could someone make a pet of this package for 32bit? to see if we came reduplicate the success so far for the 32biters still left behind.

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

#48 Post by rcrsn51 »

Ted Dog wrote:ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/cdrecord/alpha ... 13.tar.bz2. Could someone make a pet of this package for 32bit?
Slacko 5.5 has cdrtools 3.01a08. That should be a good testbed.
Last edited by rcrsn51 on Sun 05 May 2013, 02:12, edited 1 time in total.

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

#49 Post by zigbert »

rcrsn51 wrote:
zigbert wrote:Do we need the Rockridge ????
In my tests using "iso-level 4", I still need Rock Ridge to provide upper/lower case filenames, in Linux.

[Edit] Somehow, XP was able to see the full upper/lower case filenames.
My intention is to keep Rockridge always for level 4 and never for level 1. Like that, there is no option for the user.


Sigmund

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

#50 Post by jamesbond »

Ted Dog wrote:I think we need some long name support as Rockridge would. UDF would not really be needed from a data point of view. I found that a windows free software runs under wine that will be a workaround if any one wants to make true video player UDF video with in puppy. - :wink:
Yes, imgburn is a good one. It was one of my favorites when I was still addicted to Windows :)
zigbert wrote:
rcrsn51 wrote:
zigbert wrote:Do we need the Rockridge ????
In my tests using "iso-level 4", I still need Rock Ridge to provide upper/lower case filenames, in Linux.

[Edit] Somehow, XP was able to see the full upper/lower case filenames.
My intention is to keep Rockridge always for level 4 and never for level 1. Like that, there is no option for the user.
rcrsn51 is right. Rockridge is required not only for long filenames but also for other Unix stuff like permissions, more fine-grained timestamps, symlinks, etc.
My recommendation is to *always* enable rockridge (RR) no matter what iso-level you use. It does no harm for compatibility (those who don't understand RR simply ignore it or pretend that it doesn't exist), and the additional space taken is infinitesimal. Anyway, what feature do you plan to offer that makes use of "iso-level 1"?
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]

Post Reply