[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GNU/Linux, NetBSD and Mac OS X



`UFS' is a catch-all, and stands for Unix File System.  That
NeXTStep/OS-X calls its filesystem UFS is a conceit: it's really ffs
with a few _minor_ tweaks, as mentioned.  For instance, the default
file system on Solaris is UFS, however UFS on Solaris is now
journaling!  SCO's UFS is incompatible with HP-UX's UFS (which is
not the default filesystem for HP-SUX, the Veritas filesystem is,
although I think they rename it jxfs or jfs or something).  Except
for its extent-basis, ext2 could be called UFS, because some parts
are very UFS like.  FFS is really quite old, but still revered as a
break through design, albeit in the '70s.  Shock: could it really
have been that long ago?  So essentially the term UFS is so
fractured as to be meaningless.  The question is, which UFS is
Linux' UFS related to?  It's definitely not compatible with current
Solaris UFS.

a


Matt Brubeck wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 22 May 2001, Cameron Berkenpas wrote:
> 
> > OS X supports UFS? Which UFS? As in FFS (which open/net/free use)? That's
> > pretty cool but I figured OS X would have some nifty brand new filesystem.
> 
> Apple's "nifty brand new filesystem" is HFS+, which they have made the
> default on all MacOS 9/ X installations.
> 
> However, OS X also supports the UFS filesystem of its NeXTSTEP ancestry.
> This shares common UFS ancestry with the Berkeley FFS, but is not fully
> compatible. See below...
> 
> > Linux can mount UFS/FFS partitions, and read-write support is
> > available. But I STRONGLY suggest mounting FFS/UFS partitions
> > read-only, you can damage the filesystem, and in fact, I have. I've
> > not damaged a BSD file system, though, if I open a file in a text
> > editor it tends to corrupt the file (like half the file will be gone).
> > I have killed solaris filesystems through linux though... Which is of
> > course a UFS, and I don't know really much at all about OS X's file
> > system. You've been warned.
> 
> Not all UFS/FFS are equal. The Linux kernel docs have some info at
> Documentation/filesystems/ufs.txt:
> 
> <http://lxr.linux.no/source/Documentation/filesystems/ufs.txt?v=2.4.4>
> 
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-powerpc-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: