CDSpeed running under Wine on linux

vbimport

#1

Thanks Cressida!

http://club.cdfreaks.com/f96/my-first-scan-209529/
http://club.cdfreaks.com/f139/any-good-linux-scanning-apps-221314/

I got CDSpeed running under Wine on my linux box, thanks to your guidance. Here’s a screenie showing the scanning goodness. I’m using wine-0.9.55 on kubuntu 7.10. I ended up getting a Lite-on LH-20A1S. It seems to do a pretty nice burning job with my MCC004 media. This was a 12x burn on CMC-made MCC004 verbatim media.

I like my Benq 1640 better for scanning though (the Lite-on gives much smaller magnitude PIFs as compared to the benq - I don’t like that, it gives me a false sense of security).

So my next step is to put the Benq in an external enclosure and see if that’ll work. According to your other thread, you got a PATA drive in an enclosure running in CDSpeed under wine? Any special tricks needed to make that work?


#2

Hi qpieus, nice to see you got a SATA drive. Lite-On’s are a lot of fun to play with.

I don’t think you’ll have to configure anything special to use the BenQ on USB. When I first tried running CDSpeed with my BenQ 1625 on SuSE 10.0, it was more of a coincidence (through a particular BIOS setting and SuSE using the old IDE-SCSI module) that it worked. And I had to do something with mount points to get USB to work IIRC. But ever since using an internal SATA drive and openSUSE 10.2, I can use USB and FireWire drives with the standard wine (0.9.53) install (they’re all SCSI devices). Even Lite-On/C0deKing Firmware/EEPROM Utilities work, though some update (wine/xorg/nvidia - I don’t know which) killed the use of SmartBurn for me… I’ll get to try SUSE 10.3 eventually.

Anyway, having CDSpeed make using Linux a lot more fun for a CDFreak ;).


#3

Hehe, I got jealous to see you have a nice cdspeed icon in the title bar and not the antiquated wine icon like me, so I checked for another wine update and hey presto, it’s there now with 0.9.56. Still no luck with SmartBurn (the Lite-On tool) though. I would be interested to know if that works for you (I suspect it’s a graphics problem with my setup and not a wine issue, as it used to work before). Here’s a download link (it’s a simple executable, no installation required - I prefer the more business-like look of 3.1.1.6t over the newer 3.2.0, functionality is the same).

By the way, you can enable Jitter scanning with the Lite-On under the “Advanced” button (see below). And PIF’s go “in the red” above “4” in Lite-On scans, so you’ll see well enough when you have a dubious burn (it’s to do with the 8ECC scanning interval of the BenQ vs. 1ECC for Lite-On).

A last tip: backup your 20A1S EEPROM with the EEPROM Utility and your original firmware with the Flash Utility and keep these two .bin files in a safe place.



#4

Thanks for the tip on jitter and eeprom/firmware backup. I did backup the eeprom already. I didn’t backup the firmware, but I downloaded the original firmware from somewhere (codeguys, I think). I also have flashed with the latest codeguys 9L08 modified fw (that’s what the burn/scan I posted was done with).

I’ll try out the smartburn tool and report back if it worked.

I do have one problem with CDSpeed that I forgot to mention. CDSpeed crashes when I try to save the scans (the quality scan or the transfer test scan) using the save icon that’s next to the Start button. Do you have that problem? I use screen capture to save the png, which is easy enough, but it’d be nice if the save icon worked too.

As far as the magnitude of PIFs - are you saying that as long as the PIFs don’t go into the red (=4), then that’s a decent burn? I haven’t had any above 2 so far). The max has been at 2, but not above.

Oh, one more question - should I use 4x or 8x for the quality scan? I’ve looked around the forums here and have seen both. I’ve tried both speeds and they seem to provide similar results, for example on the same disc:

4x scan - 21700 PIE, 497 PIF
8x scan - 19100 PIE, 522 PIF

Both scans had the various peaks and areas of PIEs and PIFs in the same locations.

Thanks for the help Cressida.


#5

Here’s a picture of my attempt to run smartburn - no workie for me either. I also tried executing it using crossover office. That didn’t work either - got a “drive not found” error. BTW, crossover office is not able to run CDSpeed either, while wine can. Strange.



#6

Yes, that’s what I get with SmartBurn too, so it doesn’t appear to be system related. Guess if I want to be able to use it, I’ll have to go back to the older version of Wine (though I don’t remember which one that was now :p).

Saving the scans with the capture button in CDSpeed 4.7.7.15 works here (see example), but it doesn’t look perfect with the black borders, as I have “Allow the window manager to control the windows” checked in winecfg. Have you tried putting gdiplus.dll in the CDSpeed folder (or in \windows\system32)? This is required to save as png, I believe. I must say I use KSnapshot myself (as you’ll probably know, in previous CDSpeed versions the capture button was located in the title bar and not visible at all when using desktop integration).

I’ll comment on the Lite-On scans in a moment. :slight_smile:



#7

Alright, Lite-On scans. A PIF 2 max. scan is a typical good burn on a Lite-On, somewhat similar to what a PIF 8 max. would be on a BenQ. This is due to the fact that the BenQ reports PIF values per 8ECC blocks, whereas the Lite-On does so per 1ECC block, so naturally BenQ values will be higher. And an “in spec” Lite-On scan should not exceed PIF 4 (anything higher and you’ll see the colour of the spikes change from green to yellow to red in the graph).

Scan speed. 4X CLV is generally considered as the standard for Lite-On A1/A4 drives (like your 20[B]A1[/B]S) here at CDF. This stems from the fact that, depending on the individual drive and media used, many A1 drives (and to a lesser extent A4 also) will show abnormally high PIFs at the start of an 8X scan. That said, DQ scanning isn’t an exact science and anyone is free to scan as they see fit to obtain the desired information (even at 16X).

P.S. Have you noticed yet that CDSpeed starts up much faster with “Windows Version” set to Windows 98 in winecfg? :wink:


#8

Have you tried putting gdiplus.dll in the CDSpeed folder (or in \windows\system32)? This is required to save as png, I believe.

You’re a genious. Putting that dll in the windows\system32 did the trick. I can save via the CDSpeed save button, but I get the same black border as you. Maybe I’ll stay with KSnapshot, the png looks nicer and it’s just as easy.

I have not tried starting CDSpeed with anything other than the Win98 setting. It does start pretty fast though. I’ll try out some other win OS type settings and see if there’s a difference for me.

Thanks for the info on the 4x and 8x scanning. My scientifically sound comparison of a single disc scanned one time at the 2 speeds shows pretty much no difference at the start of the disc (or anywhere else for that matter). I’ll keep scanning discs at both speeds for a little while to see if there is any difference.


#9

Enjoy, qpieus! I think Wine defaults to Windows 2000 after installation. As you’ve seen, Windows 98 is better to run CDSpeed.

Here’s CDSpeed on Xubuntu 7.10 with just an internal PATA drive installed. Default installation with Wine 0.9.46 from repo’s (apparently using ide-scsi on this old i440LX PII mobo - posting from it now :p).



#11

hi at all!
I have a lite-on sh-16A7S and I use ubuntu 7.10.
The eeprom utility doesn’t work with wine for me. When I try to reset hyper tuning I receive an error :confused:
And when I try to flash the firmware too.

sorry for my english! :stuck_out_tongue:


#12

[QUOTE=torekiki;2023710]hi at all!
I have a lite-on sh-16A7S and I use ubuntu 7.10.
The eeprom utility doesn’t work with wine for me. When I try to reset hyper tuning I receive an error :confused:
And when I try to flash the firmware too.

sorry for my english! :p[/QUOTE]

Welcome [B]torekiki[/B] !

It may depend on your hardware configuration and the drivers used by Linux to access your burner. I’ve had good luck using C0deKing’s tools with my Lite-On drives connected to the SATA and USB ports of my nForce3-based motherboard. The drivers used are “sata_nv” and “usb-storage” respectively and the burners are installed as SCSI devices /dev/sr0, /dev/sr1, /dev/sr2, etc. I do [U]not[/U] use any internal PATA drives on the IDE-bus.

Have you tried setting a different Windows version in [I]winecfg[/I] yet?




#13

Thanks Cressida! :flower:
Set winecfg to Win98 is the trick!
I’m very happy use wine to upgrade my firmware.
And to set smartburn option in wine I use imgburn!

:slight_smile:


#14

Wow, that was easy :clap:

Thanks very much for the tip on SmartBurn! :flower:


#15

[QUOTE=Cressida;2010089]Enjoy, qpieus! I think Wine defaults to Windows 2000 after installation. As you’ve seen, Windows 98 is better to run CDSpeed.

Here’s CDSpeed on Xubuntu 7.10 with just an internal PATA drive installed. Default installation with Wine 0.9.46 from repo’s (apparently using ide-scsi on this old i440LX PII mobo - posting from it now :p).[/QUOTE]

This is a PATA drive? How’d you do that!

On another note, I hooked up a PATA Benq 1620 to an external HD enclosure. It seems to works for quality scanning. See the picture. One strange thing though, while the drive seems to work for quality scanning, it does not work right for the transfer rate test. It maxes out at 5x. Very weird. My internal SATA liteon works just fine for the transfer rate test. The 1620 is plugged into a USB 2.0 port. This is using wine-0.9.57 from the wine repo. Any ideas on why the transfer rate test doesn’t work right? Note that the quality scan on the 1620 external takes the same amount of time as the quality scan on the internal SATA liteon (8 minutes or so).

I’m going to attach my PATA Benq 1640 to the external enclosure and see if that one can do the transfer test properly.




#16

So here’s a quality scan of the same disc as the above post, scanned on winxp on an internal PATA Benq 1640. It’s basically the same result as the PATA Benq 1620 attached via an external HD enclosure on my linux box. Pretty neat - this 1620 was just sitting in my spare parts pile, it looks like I could use this as my “quality scanner” since it’s giving the same scan result as my beloved 1640.

I still want to try the PATA 1640 on the external enclosure on the linux box to compare to the 1620. Maybe that transfer test will work right…



#17

Hmm qpieus, USB performance isn’t quite up to XP level for me in SUSE, but I do get close to or up to 16X transfer speed, depending on the USB enclosure used. I think maybe that USB hard disk adapter you’re using isn’t suitable for optical drives, or at least it’s not very compatible with the BenQ. Does that TRT work better in XP with the same connection? Scanning doesn’t need high transfer rates as it’s just transmitting the scan data, not the actual data on the disc (it even works on USB 1.1).

I didn’t do anything ;), but Xubuntu installed the drive as /dev/sr0 (SCSI-device) and not as /dev/hdc (IDE-device). It depends on the hardware and how Linux decides to use it. I’m sure it’s possible to “force” it to use the SCSI driver on other installations, but I’m not that good. It would be better if the author of CDSpeed could make some adjustments, seeing as other CD/DVD related programs don’t have the same problem accessing PATA drives under Wine.


#18

That’s a good idea - I’ll plug the “external” 1620 into an xp machine and see what happens.


#19

I hooked up my benq 1640 to the external enclosure. The transfer rate test did not work with this drive either. Nor did the TRT work on my XP machine when I plugged the “external” 1640 into it. So this problem must be caused by something with the enclosure electronics. Oh well, not a big deal since my SATA liteon can do the TRT for me. The benqs work perfectly for quality scanning when attached to the enclosure. I thinking of buying a IDE to USB converter like this one:

http://www.emtcompany.com/products/adapters/dxusbide-usb-to-ide-adapter-cable.htm

so I don’t have to use the enclosure mechanism with my benq. Anyone familiar with this type of converter?


#20

Here’s some more scans for anyone interested.

Scan 1: Benq 1640 in external enclosure, scanned on linux pc.
Scan 2: Benq 1620 in external enclosure, scanned on linux pc. These 2 scans show that the 1640 and 1620 give basically the same scan result.

Scan 3: Benq 1640 in external enclosure, scanned on XP pc. This shows that the Benq 1640 in an external enclosure scans the same under linux or XP (compare to scan 1).

Scan 4: Internal Benq 1640, scanned on XP pc. This shows that the “external” 1640 give the same scan result as the internal 1640 (compare to scan 3).