Hi, > I'm sorry, I'm running a home mail server using a dynamic IP address
Your mails are marked as "spam" but i do not allow my mail provider's automat to drop any mails. I now got the two missing mails Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:14:58 -0300 Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:16:11 -0300 just together with your newest mail Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:11:35 -0300 The culprit seems to be host33.190-230-6.telecom.net.ar which sat on the mails since monday, according to "Received:" headers. (Your own machine ?) > > If Brasero can burn to a disk file as "drive" > > target, then try whether it is as slow > Yes, it does. It took about 4.5 minutes to build a 4.4GB image. That's about 16 MB/s = 12 x DVD speed. Not overly fast but no reason to slow down burning to 2.5 DVD speed. > But it seems like Brasero uses growisofs, and AFAIK growisofs doesn't use > libisoburn to make the image, right? The proposed xorriso commands would do a similar run as Brasero did with the disk file as "drive". The data would flow through an interface object between libisofs and libburn. libburn would forward them to the fastest known consumer: /dev/null. I.e. the gathering of input data and production of the ISO image stream would be the same as in Brasero. The further data processing would not. It might be that this experiment becomes necessary if there cannot be found a reason why Brasero produces its ISO image at >= 12x speed but hands it over to growisofs at only 2.5. So, now we should ask the brasero developers whether they have an idea what could be the bottleneck between libisofs and growisofs. If there is no insight emerging, then you should make a xorriso dummy run on DVD-R. Maybe we are "lucky" by seeing a similarly bad performance. Then i would have a jacking point for own examinations. Have a nice day :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
