On a different note. Anyone ever write a CD/RW that other machines can't
read, but you know it's there cause you can see the burn marks?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Clinton [mailto:clintonj@umkc.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 10:15 AM
> To: kclug@ItDepends.com
> Cc: kclug@kclug.org
> Subject: Re: cd copier
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Jim Herrmann wrote:
> | Jason, were those writers on the same IDE channel?  I 
> wonder if you could put
> | one on each channel and still make it work.  You would 
> probably also want
> | "Burn-Proof" turned on.  That allows a buffer underrun to 
> occur, and still
> | not burn coasters.  If you had a Promise IDE card, you 
> could theoretically
> | have 4 drives on separate IDE channels.  Just a thought.
> |
> 
> Hum, well, they were on the same channel and they both had 
> burn-proof enabled.
> The interesting thing about burning them was that if one CD 
> finished burning
> before the other did, then cdrecord couldn't seem to issue 
> the eject command
> until the IDE bus was free. Thus, they would both eject at 
> the same time. This
> tells me that either (a) the SCSI Generic implementation on 
> Linux is not able to
> handle multitasking SCSI emmulation or (b) my Promise IDE 
> controler doesn't
> handle it. Either way, if you're going to be using linux for 
> this CD burning
> machine, I'd go with either CD burners on seperate IDE 
> channels or a SCSI
> implemenation (which would be more expensive).
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQE9uA5vtSqjk42zvwkRAqA7AKCs8wQ4DjV3a0wEMAIUbefJzEurAgCgkM7x
> yiPba3x92phwDAGRxAJ4ow4=
> =/Qlz
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> 
> 
> majordomo@kclug.org
>