[k3b] Re: Need help, please, with burning DVDs

[Basil Chupin]

On 02/04/2011 12:13, NoOp wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 07:11 PM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>> On 30/03/2011 11:37, NoOp wrote:
>>> On 03/29/2011 06:24 AM, Basil Chupin wrote:
>>>> cdrecord has no permission to open the device
>>> Have tried some of the fixes/workarounds from:
>>> <http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=%22cdrecord+has+no+permission+to+open+the+device%22&btnG=Search>
>> Thanks for this. I did check for the error messages I was getting but
>> not for this particular one you have above and what was suggested
>> (including the one above) did nothing [even after I replaced the burner
>> and got the error messages when burning discs #5 and #6 as mentioned in
>> my response to Richard]. With a new DVRW coming tomorrow, I'll come
>> closer to finding out if it is the device or Ubuntu/k3b.
>>
>> (BTW, reading the search results in google re the problem only confirms
>> what others have said which is that it is easier and quicker to ask in
>> this mail list rather than go wading thru google-doogle: the most recent
>> advices seen in the doogle were dated 2008 while some went back to 2004
>> or so - not exactly up-to-date information.)
>>
>> BC
>>
> Right... but in searching some of those are possible
> solutions/troubleshooting hints, also specific log messages etc.
>
> You provided k3b error messages, but nowhere do I find that you checked
> the dmesg and other system messages. At least if you did, I didn't
> readily see it in this thread.

Nobody asked for these extracts from these logs which I would have 
provided on request.

While one does try to provide as much info as possible in an enquiry, 
one doesn't overwhelm by providing pages of info which will befuddle the 
mind of those who read the post.

> Some had issues with groups, others with memory limits, etc. Simply
> because search results aren't up-to-the-minute doesn't mean that they
> can't provide hints suggestions where to look. And you've noted that
> throwing new hardware doesn't resolve the issue. So I'd recommend that
> you *actually* take some time to check the google links... may take
> awhile (did for me)

It did for you, eh? So what is it which you learnt to solve my problem? 
Please spell it out.

The point in all this is that there is so much *IRRELEVANT* and 
out-of-date information on this google thingie that reading it is only 
for those who have nothing better in life to do than to read crap 
without getting anywhere fast.

If at least the stuff of this google thingie was purged regularly and 
anything less than 1 year old was wiped out, zapped, then maybe what one 
finds on the google thingie may become worth reading.

One has a problem which needs resolving quickly. One therefore needs a 
quick answer to the problem. One does NOT get it by reading anything on 
google thingie because it may be something written some 5 years ago and 
which now had no bearing/relevance to the current state of development 
in either computer hardware or versions of computer software. For 
example, some of the references re what you are referring to here are 
going back to 2003/4, for chrissake.

OK, so someone angrily and in indignation stomps his/her foot and 
shouts, "Search the Launchpad!". OK, so one does this - and what do they 
find? A bug report that has been first reported at least 3 years ago but 
still hasn't been acted on and still hasn't been resolved!



> Note that I'm not trying to make light of the problem, I'm instead
> trying to point you to areas that I'd use to troubleshoot a similar
> problem.

I understand and appreciate this. But one has to understand that one 
does not have the time to do extensive research to solve a problem when 
one does not always know what to look for to solve the problem. The 
search engines rely on key words to get you the info. But one does not 
always know what that search-key word may be!

Also, as I already stated, what one may find is years out-of-date. Not 
only that but what people have given as "advice" is often than not sheer 
crap: it's not fact but simply opinion - and most of the time not even 
good opinion. Spending time wading thru all this, when you want a quick 
answer to a problem which is 'critical' to one's system's operations, is 
not acceptable.

Some people have nothing better to do with their time but to spend time 
looking and recording URLs containing pseudo-solutions to problems. 
Others don't have that time to spend and would like to get a simple 
answer to their problem if the responder actually knows that answer and 
who doesn't go into a tirade about, "why don't you read this, read that, 
search this, search that, you stupid, inferior and ill-informed, 
person". If one knows the answer then just simply state "The answer 
is...... and if you want to know more or confirm what I just stated then 
go here....".

BC

-- 
Any experiment in life will be at your own experience.