Re: Why xcdroast and not gcombust?

[seth vidal <skvidal phy duke edu>]

On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 16:25, Steve Bergman wrote:
> I was just wondering why xcdroast gets included as the standard cd
> writer and not gcombust.  I always end up frustrated with xcdroast and
> gcombust is quite friendly.  Also, it's obvious how to write an existing
> iso image with gcombust and I don't see that xcdroast can even do it. 
> Plus gcombust fits in nicely with Bluecurve and is at least a GTK app,
> whereas xcdroast is, well, whatever it is.  I there a licensing issue or
> something?
> 
> Then again, eventually, I suppose, nautilus will do it all.

Let's hope not. Nautilus lacks the configurability you'd want out of a
cdburning application.

K3b does a nice job on cdburning and has the options necessary for
useful disk burning like *gasp* burning audio cds.

-sv