The method for loading from CD
 

Please correct me if I am incorrect.
I think I understand how to load from CD, which would be:

mount /dev/cdrom

Then, the contents are displayed in /mnt/cdrom in which event, I can then run cp filename to /blah/blah and thus I now have the contents on my system.

Yes?

If this is correct, then moving on to my next issue, which is writing.

Is the command:

cdrecord directory, then iso name, then device to create the iso?
I am confused in this area.
Then what command do I use to get the iso or other data on to the disc?

I have a image called test.iso in my home directory or where ever. I want to burn it to the cd.

Thank you sir. :)

Another question.
How to create an iso?
must I create an iso of the file before I burn, or can I just run that command and sub iso for (name of file) ?

Get a cd burning program like gtoaster, xcdroast or k3b (my favourite) and then you can use it just like nero on windows.

I sincerely appreciate the advice sir. :)
However I am attempting to stay away from letting the gui do my work for me, as all of the Linux work I will be doing (admin servers) shall be from ssh.

Besides the point, my boss tells me if I do the following, I'll have my hands chopped off:

1. Use a GUI.
2. Reach for a mouse. (Force of habit be damned)
3. Call VI (Vai).
4. Not remember that Linux is case sensitive.
5. Use a GUI.

(Did I mention use a GUI?)
:D

So, this will force me to learn the commands.

Thank you!

That is great advice. The graphical programs work like line commands but not always the way you would like and only do stuff the way they were built. Command line allows you much more flexibility and robust.

I am not at my home linux computer to try it out, I think there is a command like mkisofs.

man mkisofs for details

I use something like:

The best way to use linux is with the console at "ctrl+alt+F1", and the GUI at "ctrl+alt+F7". This way you get the best of both worlds. A human interface device is meant to improve speed, and ease of use. A mouse can be a great tool, given the proper usage. A GUI can be of much use, given the proper application. Anyone who makes themselves a relic of the past by refusing to embrace superior technology should themselves be fired. There is no room for that in a work place. To use the tool, which works best, is the correct way. Having as many tools as you can get in your toolbox is being prepared. A GUI saves much time. A mouse and keyboard together are better than either separately. In fact, it is better not to rely on PC's only. PC's are only good for certain things, on a small scale. You can't run an enterprise on a PC, or many PC's. A single IBM midrange, running 10 virtual servers, all under the control of the master operating system, can support 1000 lan clients, an e-commerce website, handle all security, hold all data, heat the building, and smile. That would make linux puke.

You should show your boss your signature on this forum.

How much more productive can you get over typing " cdrecord -v test.iso" or "makeisofs -V "volume label" -J -r -v -o filename.iso"?

I don't think any of us said the GUI was dumb to use, it has it's uses. Heck I even use K3b. The main problem you will see on this board is question after question, about " how do I make <program> do this function?" When if they knew how to type, they could do the same task by changing a few parameters.

I answered the question the way that was the easiest to perform. I had no idea if the person has a certain software or even knew how to load/configure any software. My answer was even efficient.

Thank you AwesomeMachine and TexasDevildog.

Indeed it would appear that AwesomeMachine is very passionate about the GUI.
I hope one day to be as such for Linux as a whole, both with and without Gnome or KDE.

For the moment, I should clarify.

My network is running enterprise as well as a few other O/S, none of which are windows based. I will be required (after my apprenticeship is over) to log into the machines both locally and remotely.

Since it appears that Putty or other tunneling programs do not have an emulator for X-windows, and since I use windows on my notebook, I have to agree with my boss for the time being, in that it would be for efficient, when observing a downed server to simply tunnel in, fix the issue and get out.
I am not 100% sure, but it seems that having the xserver running on a production machine just for the event that it goes down and needs a friendly interface when I log in is wasteful of resources, what do you think? (I am trying to ask this in the most humblest of ways, as I understand that it *could be seen as flippant, but please know that it is not intended that way at all

I apologize if I had not perhaps explained this previously. I am practicing on my PC at the moment with Enterprise.

AwesomeMachine mentioned that it shouldn't work on a PC? why is this? Will I run into issues later?


Thanks again all for taking the time to aid and teach me.

In friendship.

:Pengy:

Have you tried to use ssh with the -Y option. ;)

Your boss is indeed very wise. Every windows user should spend a while in his expert hands.