4 ms·
> M-Disc BD has the drawback of being Blu-ray, which seems to have gratuitously obnoxious things about it that I don't want to deal with on Linux. I don't have
by TacticalCoder 2y ago
> M-Disc BD has the drawback of being Blu-ray, which seems to have gratuitously obnoxious things about it that I don't want to deal with on Linux.
I don't have one yet (still burning DVDs) but what'd be the obnoxious things to deal with when burning Blu-ray discs on Linux compared to burning DVDs?
- vkaku 2y agoThere are no drawbacks if you have a Blu-Ray drive. Even the software and the filesystem I use to write on them - UDF 1.02 - are supported on computers 25 years older, even Windows 98. Since this is read-only, it makes it a safe choice. It's almost as if one is very comfortable with CDs, and then had to a 6x bump to DVDs, and then a further 6x bump to BDs. And then another 4x bump to 100GB BDs. Only difference is that the FS you may end up using may not have Joliet/ISO9660 portions but just plain old UDF. You can always write any ISOs you want to smaller discs, or avoid long file names etc. and stay compatible - and if you're building data backups, do your research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Disk_Format https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Disk_Format There is some concern because some distributions in the past used to deny/disallow the UDF module https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/115269/centos-6-4-unable-to-mount-disc-doesnt-like-udf https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/115269/centos-6-4-u... but I've never run into any problems using a UDF image, like, ever. Linux support on any 2.4.x kernel and above has been fine.