Heya guys, I want to get my drive offset for a Cdrom drive thats on my Linux Box, can I just simply pop that drive out and into my windows box and use EAC to test and determine its Offset number?

Just wanna make sure that the drive itself is the only variable, and that it wont be a slightly diff number when back in my linux box. (I checked Accuraterip , there was only 1 entry for that drive and gave it a -24 offset. Its not enough entries for me to just blindly trust, though if it matches it, that would be a great reinforcement that its correct)

Thanks guys. (Im currently having trouble with my OpenGL on my linux box, so Wine+EAC/Accuraterip is outta the question for the time being :/)

It doesn't matter.

I use Linux too (SUSE 10.2 along with XP on dual boot). I wish there was something as good as EAC available for it. But I had good results with virtualizing Windows XP with VMware; here, EAC works 100% with it, so you might want to try that one out (if you're too lazy to always reboot between Linux and XP, like me )

Not a bad idea, but I dont acually need it to rip, I use Rubyripper instead of EAC, does prettymuch the same thing (and if it wasnt for accuraterip online md5 comparisons, Exactly the same thing) I just need something to tell me what the correct offset is for my linux boxes Cdrom, so i can input that value into Rubyripper. And as far as I can tell, there is absolutely nothing in Linux that can do that :/ (aside from some lameo app that would just check your device ID and pull up the value from an accuraterip offline database, not acually testing it)

What's lame about that? Just use the damn offline database, you can trust it (have a look at the column "Submitted By"!). There's no voodoo magic involved! Offsets are tied to the drive models. Period.

Well for me its lame since my drive model like I said above has only 1 entry, so who is to say that 1 guy is even accurate :/ its not like one of those 500+ confirmed entry plextors or something

I seriously doubt this!

Perhaps you can compare all the features and conduct a test in order to substantiate these claims?

Aside from less tweekable settings whats the difference? They both use lame to encode, so barring nothing goes wrong and they used the same quality settings and offset, the final product should have the exact same file size/md5. And they both rip twice to compare as added security.

I have no need to do a full comparison, as people have done them for EAC vs Grip (using cdparanoia and lame) and the results were the same, but the negative for Grip was that it diddnt have access to accuraterip and that it diddnt have the double ripping/md5 checking that EAC did. And Rubyripper is just a different frontend for cdparanoia and lame, but adds that main feature.

whether 2 programs are identical is not purely judged by the result. You can get the same answer through different methods, and for some CD's/drives it won't matter. but for some, it will.

for a program to be "the same" as EAC for most of us, it would have to have the same or better levels of error correction, allowances for drive "differences" and the like. it's not just a matter of any ripper program that has a few quality switches.