k3b and burning CDs

Hmm, when also people who are familar with FreeBSD have given up to use k3b, then something is wrong with this piece of software on FreeBSD, can you agree with this? But what is wrong?
K3b doesn't burn CDs. sysutils/cdrtools does it for K3b. K3b is just a stupid GUI in front of it and several other programs which interact with hardware or do various data format conversion (for example libmad library is used to convert .wav files into .mp3). I don't even like much sysutils/cdrtools. This is how I burn iso on my OpenBSD desktop with the tools from the base. Open the shell and type

doas cdio tao cd58.iso

Sorry. We just are not thinking in the same terms.
 
K3b doesn't burn CDs. sysutils/cdrtools does it for K3b. K3b is just a stupid GUI in front of it and several other programs which interact with hardware or do various data format conversion (for example libmad library is used to convert .wav files into .mp3). I don't even like much sysutils/cdrtools. This is how I burn iso on my OpenBSD desktop with the tools from the base. Open the shell and type

doas cdio tao cd58.iso

Sorry. We just are not thinking in the same terms.

Hi Oko,

thanks for explanation another kind of handling cds on terminal. I know that k3b is a GUI uses software like cdrecord, wodim and so on. For ripping and converting CD tracks I also like abcde, syntax is very simple. But why to depreciate k3b as stupid? For a lot of people this GUI is very helpful, so it is useful as tool for some people and IMHO we should respect this. In some cases terminal is faster, in some cases GUI is faster. When you start to create a link ln -sf ... I've done this with dolphin per simple drag&drop. Converting files in folders and subfolders can be handled by a little shell script in short time, but it also can be handled easy with soundkonverter in short time, last method is a lot of more intuitive and gives me more freedom. First method learning something about scripting is a must, in case of soundkonverter it is a possibility, because soundkonverter doesn't hide background mechanism and I can study it but don't have to study it for getting a result. You want exactly to know about mechanism which gives the result and I want to get the result and when I'm interesting in mechanism, I study it. Both should be accepted and respected.

Edit because of thread splitting, thanks to wblock@

Kind regards,
Holger
 
Last edited:
Hi Oko,
For a lot of people this GUI is very helpful, so it is useful as tool for some people and IMHO we should respect this.
And I agree with your statement 100%. However those people have no business using FreeBSD. If they want something little BSD-ish they should get themselves a MAC. One thing I hope you will learn from this exchange if you decide to become the member of BSD community that we don't share delusional desktop dreams of Linux community. There is no market for such thing as a UNIX desktop. Even major research universities in U.S. in large part use OS X, Windows, and in the worse case scenario Ubuntu. Once when you start moulding Linux to accommodate hypothetical would be users who are accustom to other OSs you are destined to create crappy clone of that other OSs. That is exactly how I feel about Ubuntu for example. It is so far removed from UNIX that it feels alien to me and I work all they long on UNIX like systems.

Playing with OSs is a big waist of time unless you are paid to do so. Normal people get themselves a MAC and take their children on Sunday to park instead of making patches for their favourite OS.
 
I always prefer the command line, but K3B does something which Oko doesn't mention. It does the appropriate kind of file management pre burn. Oko, how do you take a few hundred files and make it add up to exactly what it takes to fill a CD?
 
Playing with OSs is a big waist of time unless you are paid to do so. Normal people get themselves a MAC and take their children on Sunday to park instead of making patches for their favourite OS.

I like that. :) Except I see MAC and Windows people struggling for hours to try to do simple things sometimes. Other times, they just don't bother because they can't figure it out. I don't see any proof whatsoever that Windows or MAC is any easier for an amateur than FreeBSD is. Another thing (perhaps less common) is weirdos like me who, because of disability, need to sit down a lot but refuses to watch TV (even if I was getting paid). If I had the stomach for proprietary operating systems, I'd probably take the time to figure them out though.
 
Hi Oko,

One thing I hope you will learn from this exchange if you decide to become the member of BSD community that we don't share delusional desktop dreams of Linux community. There is no market for such thing as a UNIX desktop.

I like GNU/Linux and I start to like FreeBSD and maybe DragonFlyBSD also. And I want to use *BSD as desktop system. Why should it not be possible to have a more userfriendly setting up and configuring procedure of *BSD as desktop system? Maybe tools like desktop-installer can be one step in that direction. And additional Howto's and similar stuff. Don't understand me in a wrong way, I don't want that *BSD starts to develop as a Linux clone.

Kind regards,
Holger
 
Back
Top