Recommendation *against* UFS
- To: debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Recommendation *against* UFS
- From: Wilhelm *Rafial* Fitzpatrick <rafial@well.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 22:54:04 -0800
- Message-id: <v03102800b6e5e85a3504@[199.164.144.10]>
- In-reply-to: <985405231.17911.0.camel@spectrolite>
- References: <v03102801b6e0ae16b3eb@[199.164.144.10]> <v03102801b6e0ae16b3eb@[199.164.144.10]>
After playing around with my now triple booting (debian/osx/classic) PBG4
for a couple hours, and discovering that
a) osx was slow b) airport was broken c) classic was broken
I reinstalled OSX formatting the partition to HFS+, instead of UFS as it
had bit.
OSX runs about twice as fast now, airport works and classic works. Also, I
have booted classic MasOS standalone since doing this, and it did *not*
debless the OSX stuff. Apparently, this problem has been fixed.
So I thought I'd put this info out those considering OSX alongside Linux,
that HFS+ seems to be the way to go with the 1.0 release. The only
drawback is you can't mount your OSX partition under linux...
-raf
______________________________________________________________________
Eric: I want to live in a world where software doesn't suck //////////
Richard: Any software that isn't free sucks ////////// rafial@well.com
Linus: I'm interested in free beer ///// <http://www.3roses.com/> ////
Reply to: