Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sat, 11 May 1996 03:42:30 -0700 | From | (Ben Wing) | Subject | Re: linux on HFS? why not HPFS instead? |
| |
In article <31900B2B.41C67EA6@sccm.stanford.edu> you write: |Matthias Urlichs (urlichs@noris.de) wrote: |[snip] |> Unfortunately, you cannot create a case sensitive HFS file system. HFS is |> specified to be case preserving. A Macintosh would have a severe case of |> indigestion if you fed it with a directory in which you have created both |> "Makefile" and "makefile". |> |> On a case-preserving file system, of course, your Makefile would still be |> fount when you type M<tab>. But the only reasonably compatible way to deal |> with this issue is to have the HFS file system return an error if you try |> to create a makefile when Makefile exists. |[snip] | | That is what the current HFS module for Linux does. You get |EEXIST if you try to create 'makefile' when 'Makefile' exists in the same |directory. (which is stretching the truth only slightly). The idea of an |Extended HFS (EHFS) would involve some sort of name mangling to allow them |to coexist, perhaps making one of them something like 'MAKEFILE00001'.
Just my (obviously very opinionated) two cents here ...
IMHO "case-insensitive but case-preserving" (VFAT does this as well) is an incredibly broken way of doing things. I had to fix up Win-Emacs to work on this kind of file system, and I cannot begin to tell you what a pain in the ass it is to deal with this. (On the other hand, case-insensitive and not case-preserving, like the standard FAT file system, is much much easier to deal with.)
ben -- "... then the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom." -- Anais Nin
|  |