CD-ROM LG vs. Mandrake 9.2
 

na CDRinfo pojawil sie ciekawy njus od SoBala:

jak Linux moze zepsuc (fizycznie) naped ?????????
chyba, ze Mandrake flashuje bios tego napedu :o (i to flashuje BARDZO umiejetnie)

jakies jaja, czy co, ale przeciez teraz blizej do swiat wszystkich swietych, niz do prima aprilis, wiec dowcipu nie rozumiem

co o tym sadzicie?

ja nie wiem co o tym sądzić :blee: ciesze sie, ze nie instalowalem z LG ;), poza tym wg mnie 9.1 jest lepsza.

na forum Mandrake'a jest taka lista:

fried:
COMPAQ CRD-8322B(CP1)
CRD-8400B (machine: Dell Optiplex gx1)
CRD-8400B (machine: IBM PC 300 PL)
CDR-8400B(mi)
CRD-8400C
COMPAQ CRD-8402B
LG CRD-8480C (machine: Old Dell XPS T650r)
GCR-8481B (machine: Dell Optiplex gx270; rom: 1.06; date: jun 2003)
CRD-8482B (machine: Dell Optiplex GX1)
GOLDSTAR CDR-8482B (machine: HP Vectra VL400; firmware: 1.01)
CRD-8482B (Dell Precision 220, rom: 1.05)
LG ?? (machine: HP Vectras VL4xx)
GCC 4480B DVD/CD-R/RW/CDROM (firmware 1.00 - upgrading firmware to 1.01 workarounds problem)

work:
LG GMA-4020B DVD-RW
LG GCC-4120B CDRW/DVD
LG CD-RW CED-8080B DVD/CD-R/RW/CDROM
LG CD-RW CED-8120B (motherboard: ASUS K7M)
HL-DT-ST GCC-4480B (machine: Shuttle SB 62 G2 - i865/ICH5; firmware 1.01 - WARNING, firmware 1.00 is reported to have the fry problem!)
HL-DT-ST RW/DVD GCC-4480B (motherboard: ASUS A7N8X-Deluxe)
HL-DT-STDVD-ROM GDR8161B (motherboard: Soyo)
HL-DT-ST CD-RW GCE-8240B
HL-DT-ST GCE-8481B CD-CDRW (chipset: SIS 651/962)
HL-DT-ST CD-ROM GCR-8520B
HL-DT-ST GCE-8520B (motherboard: ASUS P4P800)
LG CD-RW CED-8081B



czy ktokolwiek zdazyl juz sobie zepsuc naped instalujac tego Linuxa? ;)



ps. jako wyjasnienie jeden z forumowiczow wysunal teorie (nie bede tego tlumaczyl, bo wiekszosc i tak zrozumie, a jak komus bardzo zalezy to i tak rozszyfruje):
"if the driver has some sort of bad commands it could cause the system to send the wrong signal to the cdrom drive, causing it to react incorrectly and burn itself out"

inny dopisal cos takiego:
"This is a drive problem. The LG CD-ROM firmware did not stick to the established standards. Probably due to cost cuts to 'save a buck'.

Where LG says that they do not test or support their drives in Linux is just a cop-out, this is just a standard cover your ass policy when problems crop up.

Devices are supposed to protect eeprom registers... they should be out of the way, where nothing will go for starters, and they should only be accessible through special routines (i.e. flash program)(thanks Grogan)

If a developer can brake (fry a chip) a CD-ROM with software, something is wrong with that drive model. How can anyone develop any device driver, if you are always at risk of burning the device out?"