?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Oh lordy! You know, there's a lot of interesting stuff in the wacky… - The tissue of the Tears of Zorro [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
tearsofzorro

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Jan. 8th, 2006|01:23 am]
tearsofzorro
[Tags|, , , ]
[mood |confusedconfused]

Oh lordy! You know, there's a lot of interesting stuff in the wacky wacky world of hardware in linux.

So just so people know, I have an old motherboard (I know the PC term is mainboard now, but I'm sticking with motherboard!), so I don't have an onboard sata controller, so we got this (Promise SATA300 TX4). Turns out it's released drivers for linux and the like, which is quite cool. Of course, nobody seems entirely able to answer the simple question of /dev/hdX or /dev/sdX - which to me is a slight drawback. On the other hand... the more I look at this stuff I'm thinking it's under scsi (i.e. sdX etc). Rather, it's should be under scsi by rights. Just because it SHOULD be, doesn't mean it IS. I'm using 2.4.19 (so I'd not be surprised if it's under /dev/wow_thats_fuckin_futuristic_man) and one article on sata and backporting this stuff to the 2.4 kernel talks about switching things from hdX to sdX - which has me wondering if it'll be another hdX or what the hell.

It would be nice if it was in a freakin' faq. Or are we meant to be born knowing this stuff? Even the documentation of the module source from the promise site is a bit terse and doesn't mention how it'd show up under devfs. *thump* I want to hit linux kernel coders with a 12" lead-filled schlong made specially for the purpose by ftmprosthetics.com.

At any rate, I will figure this out. At any rate it looks like a non-problem for windows. And when I come to installing gentoo, I can sort this out rather than patching a *very* broken system to use a shiny shiny sata controller. Then I'll have another non-issue.

Anyway, other than that, I need to remember where in the hell SuSE puts its stuff for what you modules you wanna load at startup. I'm sure YaST could probably help with this though. I think that's for another night. *sigh*
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: ebel
2006-01-08 01:29 pm (UTC)
Ah the joy of Linux hardware. Are the drivers open source or binary? Binary drivers are the work of satan. And kernel 2.4.19. WTF? Are you running Slackware? I ran slackware for a while. :) Get yourself 2.6 kernel. Then you can experience the joy of udev. It gives you so much more control over what device nodes are created?

Couldn't you just loop over all the /dev/hd* and /dev/sd* and see which complain about 'Device not found'?
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tearsofzorro
2006-01-09 01:22 am (UTC)
Running Suse 8.1 - a bit out of date and is a bitch to upgrade (one of the reasons I wanna upgrade to gentoo)

Overall, upgrading this distro to 2.6 would be a bad plan.

As for the SATA drivers, they're GPLed by Promise, which is cool... and definately not the work of the devil :)

As for looping over hd* and so forth, it just seems like a hack to be perfectly honest. Anyway, I'm sure /proc is my friend in this case.

When I install gentoo, I'm probably just going to have a 2.4 kernel just for burning stuff (apparently Jorg gets pissed off that the scsi interface bits and bobs in the 2.6 kernel change whenever Linus sneezes, so he recommends people use 2.4 for burning at least.

At any rate, it'd just be nice to have a fucking faq. I'll probably want to contribute that question to one once I'm finished.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ebel
2006-01-09 02:46 pm (UTC)
Ah Jorg Schilling.... He has his own way to do everything... I haven't used commandline cd burning in ages and ages. Either K3B ior (more recently) gnome-cd-burner.

There's nothing really hackish about the looping, you want to find out which device it is. Spend 2 minutes looping and you have your answer. Problem solved.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tearsofzorro
2006-01-09 07:13 pm (UTC)
Yeah, the reason I do it command line and not with K3B or similar is because any graphical burning software I've used is just a frontend for schilling's tools, or Andreas Mueller's software, or mkisofs. In the beginning they didn't work, so the frontends didn't work... I had to work tooth and nail to get the bastids working, so once I did, I was so used to doing it command line I just never stopped. Plus it means I can init into level 2, and just s_nice (it's my suided nice command - only available to wheel group) to -20 and run it. Means I have very few other processes competing for time.

So if you use those, what programs do they use to handle the burninging of DVDs and crap?
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ebel
2006-01-10 11:51 am (UTC)
Being able to run the cdrecord process at -20 on it's own is good to prevent toasters, but I think that day is past. We have really fast processors and really fast cd burners, so I don't think there's much chance of a bufferunderrun if you're just doing normal desktop stuff.

I think Schilling has made dvdrecord (though I've never used it). I burned a dvd from the command line once, but can't remember what the command was called. growiso I think.

Gnome-cd-record treats a blank DVD as a really big CD, so it acts the same. I think all CD/DVD burners should do that.

I tried creating a DVD with video and menus under Linux. It's hard. And annoying.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: tearsofzorro
2006-01-10 12:36 pm (UTC)
'tisn't Schilling. He's made cdrecord-proDVD, but it's not open. It's free as in beer, but only tentatively... So I'm not using it.

looking at k3b stuff, it seems to point to dvdrwtools or similar. So I'm going to go with that. I think dvdrecord is part of it.

Oh, and here has a link to cdrecord-dvdhack. (Actually his link is wrong, it's actually: here for cdrecord-dvdhack) It seems -dvdhack is a patch for cdrecord to make it burn to dvds.

Problem with treating a DVD as a big CD is that you'll be using the iso-whatever-number filesystem for burning. That has a limit that'll never be broken on a cd (because it's bigger than a blank cd) but can be broken on a DVD, so if you're burning a file that's about a gig large, then you NEED to do it in UDF format (DVD's native format).

As for setting to -20, I just do it because I DO get less buffer underruns. While burnfree technology is standard on every drive these days, it still irks me if it does underrun, even though chances are you won't have a problem. Again, just personal preference.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: ebel
2006-01-10 06:58 pm (UTC)
Problem with treating a DVD as a big CD is that you'll be using the iso-whatever-number filesystem for burning. That has a limit that'll never be broken on a cd (because it's bigger than a blank cd) but can be broken on a DVD, so if you're burning a file that's about a gig large, then you NEED to do it in UDF format (DVD's native format).
Yes, but I I shouldn't have to care about that. I should be able to point my burning software at a folder and tell it to burn that to the blank disc in the drive. It should figure out of if it's a DVD or CD, and what filesystem to use.

I haven't manually created a CD ISO in a good long while and I have no intention of starting. It's so pointless to have to do it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)