Re: Image Disk Size
Re: Image Disk Size
- Subject: Re: Image Disk Size
- From: Luther Fuller <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 15:49:11 -0500
On May 1, 2008, I wrote:
I have an AppleScript, which creates sparseimage files of various
capacities.
In Tiger, when I selected "4.7 GB" (decimal), I got a sparseimage
file with capacity of 4.38 GB (binary) which was the exact, perfect
size to burn a DVD.
In Leopard, the same selection now produces a sparseimage file with
capacity of 4.06 GB. (I don't know if that's binary or decimal.) I
haven't yet tried to burn a DVD with one of these files.
Has something changed that invalidates my calculations in the
script? If so, what?
I've finally had time to look into this ... and I've answered my
question ... and have another.
My original code in Tiger was ...
do shell script "hdiutil create -type SPARSE -megabytes " & imageSize
& ¬
" -fs HFS+ " & imagePath & " -volname " & quoted form of imageName &
" -attach"
I did not have a -layout specifier in the command. On a PPC machine
the default layout is SPUD and on an Intel machine the default is
GTSPUD. That accounts for the size difference. So , I added " -layout
NONE " to my command and now the size of a 4.7 GB(decimal) sparseimage
is 4.38 GB(binary), which is correct.
If you use Disk Utility to make a sparseimage file, you will have to
choose Partitions: where one of the choices is "No partition map".
This is equivalent to " -layout NONE ".
New question ... Is " -layout NONE " a safe choice of Partitions? All
I'm doing is burning data to an optical disk. Is there any good reason
to use one of the other partition types? (such as SPUD or GPTSPUD)
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
AppleScript-Users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
Archives: http://lists.apple.com/archives/applescript-users
This email sent to email@hidden