I have to say that this is one area where Windows absolutely blows the doors off of Linux. Has anyone here been able to write a CD using Linux with a directory structure that is anything more than brain-dead simple?
It's this Rock Ridge stuff that's driving me insane. Suppose I have a directory called "August" that contains a whole bunch of differently-named subdirectories. Within each one of those unique subdirectories, there happen to be files that share the same names as some files in the other subdirectories.
I want all the subdirectories in "/home/me/August/" preserved (and their contents too of course) and sent to an ISO file in /var/tmp. So here's the command I use:
[me@sparky]$ mkisofs -o /var/tmp/backup.iso -J -r -v -V August_Backup /home/me/August/*
And here's the output I get:
...
mkisofs: Error: '/home/me/August/Dingbats/WY.pdf' and '/home/me/August/FrootLoops/WY.pdf' have the same Rock Ridge name 'WY.pdf'
...
(the error is repeated over and over for hundreds of identically named files, but files which are contained in differently-named source directories)
This is beyond lame. Apparently the Rock Ridge extension (apparently a critical requirement for being able to read your CD on some UNIX systems - god knows which ones or under what conditions: it's not like you'll easily find any helpful information about it anywhere) require EACH AND EVERY FILE TO HAVE A UNIQUE NAME REGARDLESS OF THE DIRECTORY THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN. At least, that's the best I can tell so far.
The only "solution" I can find is to add the "-D" switch to the mkisofs command. But if you read the mkisofs documention, this is what it says:
"-D switch: Do not use deep directory relocation, and instead just pack them in the way we see them. This violates the ISO9660 standard, but it happens to work on many systems. Use with caution."
What kind of trash is this? Does this really mean I have the choice of either renaming thousands of files ensuring unique names for each one regardless of the subdirectory they're in, or violating some kind of other haywire standard that, quote, should be used with caution?
And they expect me to use Linux for any kind of important backup functions?! What kind of lunacy is this? Can anyone explain what I'm doing wrong here?
It's this Rock Ridge stuff that's driving me insane. Suppose I have a directory called "August" that contains a whole bunch of differently-named subdirectories. Within each one of those unique subdirectories, there happen to be files that share the same names as some files in the other subdirectories.
I want all the subdirectories in "/home/me/August/" preserved (and their contents too of course) and sent to an ISO file in /var/tmp. So here's the command I use:
[me@sparky]$ mkisofs -o /var/tmp/backup.iso -J -r -v -V August_Backup /home/me/August/*
And here's the output I get:
...
mkisofs: Error: '/home/me/August/Dingbats/WY.pdf' and '/home/me/August/FrootLoops/WY.pdf' have the same Rock Ridge name 'WY.pdf'
...
(the error is repeated over and over for hundreds of identically named files, but files which are contained in differently-named source directories)
This is beyond lame. Apparently the Rock Ridge extension (apparently a critical requirement for being able to read your CD on some UNIX systems - god knows which ones or under what conditions: it's not like you'll easily find any helpful information about it anywhere) require EACH AND EVERY FILE TO HAVE A UNIQUE NAME REGARDLESS OF THE DIRECTORY THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN. At least, that's the best I can tell so far.
The only "solution" I can find is to add the "-D" switch to the mkisofs command. But if you read the mkisofs documention, this is what it says:
"-D switch: Do not use deep directory relocation, and instead just pack them in the way we see them. This violates the ISO9660 standard, but it happens to work on many systems. Use with caution."
What kind of trash is this? Does this really mean I have the choice of either renaming thousands of files ensuring unique names for each one regardless of the subdirectory they're in, or violating some kind of other haywire standard that, quote, should be used with caution?
And they expect me to use Linux for any kind of important backup functions?! What kind of lunacy is this? Can anyone explain what I'm doing wrong here?
