[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[no subject]
- <!--x-content-type: text/plain -->
- <!--x-date: Mon Mar 21 10:34:06 2005 -->
- <!--x-from-r13: nfgrjneg ng ynlgba-tencuvpf.pbz (Oyna Egrjneg) -->
- <!--x-message-id: 423EE76E.6010104@layton-graphics.com -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] -->
- <!--x-reference: [email protected] --> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
- <!--x-subject: [ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP? -->
- <li><em>date</em>: Mon Mar 21 10:34:06 2005</li>
- <li><em>from</em>: astewart at layton-graphics.com (Alan Stewart)</li>
- <li><em>in-reply-to</em>: <<a href="msg00340.html">[email protected]</a>></li>
- <li><em>references</em>: <<a href="msg00337.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg00339.html">[email protected]</a>> <<a href="msg00340.html">[email protected]</a>></li>
- <li><em>subject</em>: [ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</li>
> HFS stands for the Hierarchical File System. HFS
> <<a rel="nofollow" href="http://developer.apple.com/documentation/mac/Files/Files-99.html";>http://developer.apple.com/documentation/mac/Files/Files-99.html</a>> and
> HFS Plus <<a rel="nofollow" href="http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1150.html";>http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1150.html</a>> are the
> filesystem formats of Apple MacOS.
> <<a rel="nofollow" href="http://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos8/mac8.html";>http://developer.apple.com/documentation/macos8/mac8.html</a>> While the
> older one, HFS, may look rather limited today, HFS Plus includes most
> of the capabilities one can find in UFS or Berkeley FFS: long file
> names, hard and soft links, special nodes, owner and group
> information, access permissions.
>
> Additionally, both HFS and HFS Plus have a number of interesting
> features not found in UFS:
>
> * They support so called /forks,/ that is, multiple segments of
> data associated with a single file. HFS supports as little as
> two forks per file, "data" and "resource." HFS Plus was designed
> to allow for numerous named forks. However, its current
> implementation limits this capability to the two aforementioned
> forks per file.
> * Major internal structures of HFS and HFS Plus are kept as
> B-trees. An HFS Plus volume essentially consists of a small
> header and a set of B-trees. B-trees make many filesystem
> operations time-efficient.
> * HFS Plus stores filenames in Unicode, thus supporting for
> multi-language environment.
>
> Apple has recently released the original HFS kernel and userland code
> (incl. HFS Plus) under the Apple Public Source License [APSL]
> <<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/";>http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/</a>> as a part of Darwin, which
> created a nice opportunity to port it to FreeBSD.
>
> HFS and HFS Plus in FreeBSD may be of particular value to parties
> interested in sharing filesystem resources over a network from FreeBSD
> to MacOS, because there will be no need to emulate HFS-specific
> features unlike in the case of FFS backing store.
>
Mike Murphy wrote:
> Weeeeellllll....
> UFS+ is no more or less proprietary than NTFS (well, except that in
> this case its corporate parent is Apple, not Microsoft), so I guess
> you get what you pay for. I'm not sure that we can reasonably expect
> solid OSS support for such things.
>
> FAT32 is still the most, or rather least common denomitor, I'm afraid.
>
> Mike
>
>
> aaron wrote:
>
>> FAT32 seems to be the LCD for free, fully cross platform read and write.
>>
>> I have found 2 commercial HFS+ options for windblows systems, and
>> will be using them to make our Mac OSeX external 1394 (a / b) media
>> drives functional on the one windblows box we are still stick with
>> for a few audio production aps.
>>
>> Unfortunately, my research showed that HFS+ support under linux is
>> sketchy at best, with nothing showing up for newer kernels. UFS could
>> be considered, but under MAC OSeX it introduces some discrepancies
>> with "expectations" of the standard user environment.
>> Would be interested to know if you find any other solutions
>>
>> peace
>> (because the only christian faith is a faith that prizes peace above
>> all else)
>> aaron
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday 20 March 2005 01:52, John Wells wrote:
>>
>>> Guys,
>>>
>>> I'm going to reformat my ext3 drive to something compatible with a 3
>>> of the
>>
>>
>> OS's
>>
>>> in the msg subject for use as a backup drive in a usb enclosure. (I
>>> know
>>
>>
>> ext3
>>
>>> support is available for OS X and XP, but it's been hit or miss so
>>> far).
>>>
>>> FAT32 comes immediately to mind as a likely candidate, but I
>>> wondered if
>>
>>
>> anyone
>>
>>> on the list might have a better recommendation.
>>>
>>> Any info you can provide is greatly appreciated!
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> John
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ale mailing list
>>> Ale at ale.org
>>> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ale mailing list
>> Ale at ale.org
>> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
>
>
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| D. Alan Stewart |
| Senior Software Architect |
| Layton Graphics, Inc. |
| |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: astewart.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 297 bytes
Desc: not available
</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00354" href="msg00354.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> mike at tyderia.net (Mike Murphy)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00337" href="msg00337.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> jb at sourceillustrated.com (John Wells)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00339" href="msg00339.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> aaron at pd.org (aaron)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00340" href="msg00340.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> mike at tyderia.net (Mike Murphy)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00352.html">[ale] OT: Question regarding whining monitors (for you EEs out there)</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00354.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00340.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00354.html">[ale] Best FS for archiving Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows XP?</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00353"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00353"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>