noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
> P.T. Breuer wrote:
> > noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
> >>P.T. Breuer wrote:
> >>>noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
> >>There is the CDROM drive and a CDRW drive on the second bus.
> > That's what's wrong then. A cdrom must be slave to a cdrw.

> OK ... call me naive ... but why does a CDROM must be a slave to a CDRW ?

Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.

Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.

Peter

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 10:10:15 +0000, P.T. Breuer wrote:

> noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>> P.T. Breuer wrote:
>> > noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>> >>P.T. Breuer wrote:
>> >>>noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>> >>There is the CDROM drive and a CDRW drive on the second bus.
>> > That's what's wrong then. A cdrom must be slave to a cdrw.
>
>> OK ... call me naive ... but why does a CDROM must be a slave to a CDRW ?
>
> Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
>
> Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.
>
> Peter
CDroms don't do any writing, that is the job of the CDrw so many people
use the CDrom as the master to simply read discs and boot etc to take the
load off the CDrw.

--
Neil
Delete delete to get address

Hello

P.T. Breuer (<ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es>) wrote:

> Andreas Janssen <andreas.janssen@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> P.T. Breuer (<ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es>) wrote:
>
>> > noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>
>> >> I have used the CDROM drive and CDRW drive for a long time without
>> >> any problems from either win and the working RH 7.2 installation,
>> >> and have installed RH 7.2 from the CDROM drive just a week before.
>> >
>> > Jumper them correctly - the cdrom must be slave and the cdrw
>> > master.
>
>> I have been using a cdrom and a cdrw drive for a long time without
>> any problems with the cdrom being jumpered to master (/dev/hdc) and
>> the cdrw being jumpered as slave (/dev/hdd).
>
> The electronics isn't on the cdrom to make it work. Maybe you have
> been using them to read only.

No, I also used the cdrw for writing, with ide-scsi emulation (activated
for both drives).

> Or maybe you hit lucky and got a cdrom with
> more than the absolute minimum of drive electronics on it. Who can
> tell!

Maybe Samsung could tell, they made the cd drive. I will try to find
some information on the drive.

best regards
Andreas Janssen

--
Andreas Janssen
andreas.janssen@bigfoot.com
PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674
Registered Linux User #267976

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:4aultb.62e.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
>
>
> Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
>
> Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.

I call BS. Cite your source.

a) Having used CD-RWs as slaves to CD-Roms (and hard drives and zip drives,
and on occation to no master) I know that CD-RWs don't need to be master.

And the big one:

b) Why is there a "slave" jumper position on CD-RWs if they must be master?
Hardware manufactures aren't in the business of generating support calls for
themselves.

--
William Hooper

Hey, this isn't my tagline ! Who put it here ?

William Hooper <whooper@infinet.com_nospam> wrote:
> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> news:4aultb.62e.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> >
> > Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
> >
> > Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> > no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> > ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> > going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.

> I call BS. Cite your source.

You cite yours. I'll vote for my memory (I think the last time I looked
this up, I was in the atapi howto, or something equally arcane). You
google. I don't feel a need to back up my memory with quotes! If you
want to try, my first lookup would be "linux cdrom as master on ide
bus".

Oh, a random scan through the atapi howto (WHY do I do this for you?)
stumps up the following kind of burble:

Q5: I've installed the drive as the only device on the secondary
interface, with the CDROM drive jumpered as SLAVE/SINGLE, and Linux
won't see it. What am I missing?

A5: Well, quite a lot, to be frank. 99.99% of the ATAPI CDROM drives
are shipped jumpered as SLAVE or SINGLE, and this simply will not work
with Linux. By the IDE standard, a single drive on an interface must
be jumpered as MASTER. There isn't (or shouldn't be) a specification
for SINGLE in the IDE standard. Change the jumper on the back of the
CDROM drive to MASTER, and follow the directions in Question 4, and
you should be set to go.

> a) Having used CD-RWs as slaves to CD-Roms (and hard drives and zip drives,
> and on occation to no master) I know that CD-RWs don't need to be master.

I didn't say they did. I said cdroms can't be master. No electronics.

> And the big one:

> b) Why is there a "slave" jumper position on CD-RWs if they must be master?

For the same reason as there is a "term" jumper on my scsi ultra 160
disks, even though disks can't terminate busses on u160.

Alternatively, see above quoted atapi HT paras for more non-sense.

Next?

> Hardware manufactures aren't in the business of generating support calls for
> themselves.

You know very little about hardware manufacturers!

Peter

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:roentb.8oe.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
>
>
> William Hooper <whooper@infinet.com_nospam> wrote:
> > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> > news:4aultb.62e.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> > >
> > > Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
> > >
> > > Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> > > no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> > > ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> > > going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.
>
> > I call BS. Cite your source.
>
> You cite yours. I'll vote for my memory (I think the last time I looked
> this up, I was in the atapi howto, or something equally arcane). You
> google. I don't feel a need to back up my memory with quotes! If you
> want to try, my first lookup would be "linux cdrom as master on ide
> bus".

It is your claim to prove, not mine to disprove. Others have already
disagreed with you. Disproving something that doesn't exist is next to
impossible.

> Oh, a random scan through the atapi howto (WHY do I do this for you?)
> stumps up the following kind of burble:
>
> Q5: I've installed the drive as the only device on the secondary
^^^^^^^^
> interface, with the CDROM drive jumpered as SLAVE/SINGLE, and Linux
> won't see it. What am I missing?

That doesn't say anything about using a CD-RW as a slave with a CD-Rom as
master.

--
William Hooper

I started out with nothing and I still have most of it left

William Hooper <whooper@infinet.com_nospam> wrote:
> "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message news:roentb.8oe.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> >
> > William Hooper <whooper@infinet.com_nospam> wrote:
> > > "P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
> > > news:4aultb.62e.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...
> > > >
> > > > Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
> > > >
> > > > Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> > > > no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> > > > ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> > > > going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.
> >
> > > I call BS. Cite your source.
> >
> > You cite yours. I'll vote for my memory (I think the last time I looked
> > this up, I was in the atapi howto, or something equally arcane). You
> > google. I don't feel a need to back up my memory with quotes! If you
> > want to try, my first lookup would be "linux cdrom as master on ide
> > bus".

> It is your claim to prove, not mine to disprove.

No, it's your claim that cdroms can be masters to normal ide devices!
You "prove" it.

> Others have already
> disagreed with you.

No they haven't. I only recall one person, and I'm not sure that wasn't
you. And if they do, so what?

> Disproving something that doesn't exist is next to impossible.

There you are then - you prove it, since you claim you have a hold of
the fact. You find the doc that says that cdroms can master ide disks.

Maybe it exists, maybe it doesn't!

> > Oh, a random scan through the atapi howto (WHY do I do this for you?)
> > stumps up the following kind of burble:
> >
> > Q5: I've installed the drive as the only device on the secondary
> ^^^^^^^^
> > interface, with the CDROM drive jumpered as SLAVE/SINGLE, and Linux
> > won't see it. What am I missing?

> That doesn't say anything about using a CD-RW as a slave with a CD-Rom as
> master.

Nor do I much care about cdrws as slaves in particular - cdrws aren't
partcularly generic ide devices either. But if you are so sure that a
cdrom has the electronics required to master an ide bus, then put it as
master to your ide boot disk, and tell us how you get on.

Maybe you'll survive. I don't know! I recall that cdroms simply never
had the electronics on board to do that kind of thing. Maybe that's
changed lately. Nothing is forever. Maybe the electronics has got so
integrated that it's all the same nowadays!

Peter

"P.T. Breuer" <ptb@oboe.it.uc3m.es> wrote in message
news:7pmntb.hda.ln@news.it.uc3m.es...

> > It is your claim to prove, not mine to disprove.
>
> No, it's your claim that cdroms can be masters to normal ide devices!
> You "prove" it.

How is a CD-RW a "normal" ide device? Isn't it just as ATAPI as a CD-ROM
drive?

> > Others have already
> > disagreed with you.
>
> No they haven't. I only recall one person, and I'm not sure that wasn't
> you. And if they do, so what?

"No they haven't... well, that one, but nobody else..."

> > Disproving something that doesn't exist is next to impossible.
>
> There you are then - you prove it, since you claim you have a hold of
> the fact. You find the doc that says that cdroms can master ide disks.
>
> Maybe it exists, maybe it doesn't!

Following some links from "How stuff works" (you should try it sometime, you
might learn something).
http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/conf.htm
"Note that despite the hierarchical-sounding names of "master" and "slave",
the master drive does not have any special status compared to the slave one;
they are really equals in most respects. The slave drive doesn't rely on the
master drive for its operation or anything like that..."

You see, IDE (Integrated Drive Electronics) means that all the electronics
to operate the drive are (wait for it) integrated with the drive...

> > > Oh, a random scan through the atapi howto (WHY do I do this for you?)
> > > stumps up the following kind of burble:
> > >
> > > Q5: I've installed the drive as the only device on the secondary
> > ^^^^^^^^
> > > interface, with the CDROM drive jumpered as SLAVE/SINGLE, and Linux
> > > won't see it. What am I missing?
>
> > That doesn't say anything about using a CD-RW as a slave with a CD-Rom
as
> > master.
>
> Nor do I much care about cdrws as slaves in particular - cdrws aren't
> partcularly generic ide devices either.

I would rely on that memory of yours too much:
> > > > > Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.

> No, it's your claim that cdroms can be masters to normal ide devices!

You just forgot what you were talking about twice in one sentence.

--
William Hooper

If you don't care where you are, then you ain't lost

P.T. Breuer wrote:
> noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>
>>P.T. Breuer wrote:
>>
>>>noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>P.T. Breuer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>noone <noone@noone.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>There is the CDROM drive and a CDRW drive on the second bus.
>>>
>>>That's what's wrong then. A cdrom must be slave to a cdrw.
>
>
>>OK ... call me naive ... but why does a CDROM must be a slave to a CDRW ?
>
>
> Ask rather why a cdrw must be master to a cdrom.
>
> Cdroms don't have the electronics to be master to a real
> no-holds-barred full-spectrum freeform high-profile multi-vitamin
> ide read/write device. They can't write themselves, so they aren't
> going to be very good at managing somebody elses writing.
>
> Peter


Almost all of the retail PCs sold with CD-ROM and CD-RW have CD-ROM as
master and CD-RW as slave on the second IDE channel.

If CD-ROMS cannot be master to a CDRW ...

1) Why then does my existing RH 7.2 installation works well accessing
the CD-ROM and burning CDs with the CD-RW with the current setup as it
is ( CD-ROM as master, CD-RW as slave ) ?

2) Whey then does windoze ( I dual-boot ) also works well just like RH 7.2 ?

William Hooper wrote:
> "noone" <noone@noone.org> wrote in message
> news:btjmhb$kn3$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
>>So it looks like a defective CD problem, despite the fact that the
>>checkmedia process says it passed ... but there's more to this as you
>>will see below.
>
>
>
> Possibly a CD-ROM drive problem. Did you try:
>
> linux ide=nodma
>
> at the boot prompt?
>


... hhmmm .... isn't that supposed to be ideX=nodma?
Which in my case, is ide1=nodma ( since the CDROM drive is IDE channel 1 ) ?