Re: [OFF] NeXT stupidity (was Re: Finding folder from its id)
Re: [OFF] NeXT stupidity (was Re: Finding folder from its id)
- Subject: Re: [OFF] NeXT stupidity (was Re: Finding folder from its id)
- From: John W Baxter <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 17:43:12 -0800
At 17:45 -0600 3/23/2002, JollyRoger wrote:
>
Sorry, but this irritates me to no end! Just how many of us are using Mac
>
OS X on UFS volumes? My guess would be a mere handful out of every Mac user
>
on the planet. I personally know about 350 or so people who use Mac OS in
>
both professional and home environments, and not ONE is using UFS!
The future.
Classic will eventually go away. The big knock against UFS is that Classic
apps can't access such volumes. Once Classic isn't an issue, UFS will
become more popular.
And yes, I too do not have a UFS volume (because of Classic).
Also, note that I'm GUESSING. I don't KNOW that UFS has anything to do
with no ID property for items in Mac OS X Finder. As I said, the inode
number is available in UFS, and is nearly as unique as the file system file
ID in Mac OS 9. But the inode does get reused when needed sometime after
the file goes away, so its number is not AS unique.
You won't like my response to the file meta data issue, either.
--John
--
John Baxter email@hidden Port Ludlow, WA, USA
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.