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

Re: No HFS driver, and "change install priority" menu option missing -- and other bugs found while testing 2.4 boot floppies on OldWorld PowerMac

On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 11:11:49PM -0400, Rick Thomas wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, at 01:30 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >>>However... There is one important thing missing from the boot
> >>>disks.  Specifically, the "System" file is zero length.  This is
> >>>true of both boot and ofonlyboot for both 2.4 and 2.6.  It won't
> >>>boot that way.
> >>Arg, again. I have to checkup and see what is missing in the 
> >>build process,
> >>but i will not be able to do so until friday.
> >
> >I just successfully booted the kernel from
> >http://people.debian.org/~luther/d-
> >i/images/2004-09-29/powerpc/floppy-2.4/boot.img
> >and was asked for the root floppy. (on a power mac 4400/200)
> Hmmm...  You learn something new every day!
> I think I've just discovered a major difference between the "hfs" 
> implementation in 2.4 and that in 2.6.
> When one mounts an hfs filesystem under 2.4, there are a bunch of 
> pseudo-directories with names beginning with a "." that give you 
> access to the finder info and the resource forks of all the files.
> This feature is not there in 2.6.  (Or else I need to RTFM -- can 
> somebody point me to the right FM?)
> Thus, running a 2.6.8 kernel, mounting the boot.img file as an hfs 
> filesystem make it appear that the finder is zero length!  In 
> reality, only it's "text" fork (If that's the right word) is zero 
> length -- all the good stuff is in the "resource" fork, which 
> doesn't show up.
> So, I owe Sven an apology!  As Holger found out, the boot floppy is 
> perfectly functional.
> Now, is the loss under 2.6 of the HFS ".finderinfo" and ".resource" 
> pseudo-directories a bug, or a feature?

You probably need to load the hfs+ driver ?

If that doesn't solve it for you, please fill a bug report againstz our 2.6
powerpc kernel packages.


Sven Luther

Reply to: