 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / General / General / May 2007My Dilemma: Linux vs OSX
I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities in perl, etc. I find myself growing weary of needing to check many (sometimes old and conflicting) docs, databases, web pages, and How-To's just to add a piece of hardware (like a wireless card), or try some new software or protocol. I'm not a hobbyist any more; I just want stuff to work. My interests are the usual: e-mail, web news, Usenet, and perl programming. In the future, maybe Python or something else, who knows. No graphic arts, no photo editing, no sophisticated sound editing. Hence, my interest in the Mac and OSX, and my dilemma. I know that OSX "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I feel lost reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how painful was it? Does O'Reilly publish good stuff for OSX like they do for Linux? What other worthwhile printed resources are out there to start out a computer-literate but OSX newbie? HaroldWho  SignaturePowered by Slackware 11.0 Linux -- Kernel 2.6.13 News Reader slrn 0.9.8.1 > Hence, my interest in the Mac and OSX, and my dilemma. I know that OSX > "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I feel lost > reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. Both Linux and OSX are Unit variants. I wouldn't say so much that OSX looks like Linux as that both of them share a common heritage. One might consider them siblings. Have you ever used other Unix variants, or has it just been Linux? I found the differences between OSX and Linux to be on a par with the differences between other Unix variants. > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how > painful was it? Been there. Not painful at all. I had heard about the Unix base of OSX, so I thought I'd give it a try. When I got my first Mac at work (a G4 powerbook), pretty much the first thing I did was install a copy of the NAG Fortran compiler and try building some of my codes. It took maybe 10 minutes and they were working. The only things I had to do were typical of other Unix ports - select the right byte sex for the machine (I had some code that depended on that), and find where the needed libraries were. After that 10 minutes I knew I was going to be happy. I look at my Macs as being Unix machines where the system integration work has been done for me, and pretty well. You will pay a bit more than I can get a comparable Linux box, but not if you factor in th evalue of the system integration work you need to do for a Linux box. I've been there and know - it can be a lot of work. Oh, and the Macs also have this nice GUI. I've come to like it fairly well (though there are features I miss; allegedly the next major release of OS X will include something like the multiple desktops that I was used to on my Linux and Sun boxes - that's one feature I've missed). But to me, the GUI isn't what sold me; that's just a nice extra. WHat sold me was the well integrated Unix box, in conjunction with some commercial apps. > Does O'Reilly publish good stuff for OSX like they do for > Linux? What other worthwhile printed resources are out there to start out a > computer-literate but OSX newbie? I'll let others answer that stuff. I found myself pretty comfortabel just jumping in. There's a decent O'Reilly book "Mac OS X for Unix Geeks". Worth getting. I have a copy, though I can't say it is something I regularly reference. More like something I skimmed through early on. SignatureRichard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > HaroldWho Since you don't need the stuff that MacOS X offers (graphic arts, photo editing, sound stuff), have you considered Solaris X86 instead of Linux? It's been around much longer than Linux, is also Open Source, and free. SignatureDeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee... >> I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power >> user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > editing, sound stuff), have you considered Solaris X86 instead of Linux? > It's been around much longer than Linux, is also Open Source, and free. Yeah, but why not keep his opportunities open? Maybe he will have an interest in video, music, graphics, or photos in the near or far future. If so, he will have many more options with OS X. Greg SignatureTicketbastard tax tracker: http://ticketmastersucks.org/tracker.html Dethink to survive - Mclusky > > Since you don't need the stuff that MacOS X offers (graphic arts, photo > > editing, sound stuff), have you considered Solaris X86 instead of Linux? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > interest in video, music, graphics, or photos in the near or far future. If > so, he will have many more options with OS X. As a case in point, I started using OS X because I wanted a laptop to stash my photos on during weekend breaks (camera cards were small and expensive then), and I chose an iBook. It wasn't until several years later that I started taking an interest in the music and other capabilities of OS X, and was pleasantly surprised with its capabilities in that area. As it happens. at the moment I'm listening to a radio programme I recorded last week, and might just slip a couple of songs and accompanying notes from that into iTunes and thence to my iPod. SignaturePaul Sture > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I feel lost > reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. Give it a try. You can deal with it at whatever level you prefer. Most likely you'd prefer the smoother life with OSX. However, you can always instal Linux on mac too, if in the end that's what you wish to return to. > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how > painful was it? I switched from Linux to OS X (for Desktop usage, I'm still deep in Linux and *BSD for servers) and it did not hurt at all. Actually I didn't intend to switch at all -- I bought a Mac mini just to have a look at OS X and meant to install Linux on it after playing around with it a bit. Then I thought "let's see if and how I can massage it into a usable working machine for my all-day needs", which took a few days (installing a recent Emacs and getting comfortable with DarwinPorts for installing some missing pieces). Well. I'm still using the same machine and I did *not* install Linux on it... > Does O'Reilly publish good stuff for OSX like they do for Linux? What > other worthwhile printed resources are out there to start out a > computer-literate but OSX newbie? Can't help here. If you're good with Google you should be able to find all needed info online. Jochem Signature"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > a > computer-literate but OSX newbie? I made the switch to OpenBSD on desktop, laptop, and server back in 2000 and then to OS X on the desktop in 2002. It was slightly easier going from OpenBSD to OS X on the desktop than it would be straight from Linux to OS X but it's not that big of a deal. Coming from either Linux or a BSD you're still going to need to learn the OS X ways of doing things like netinfo, launchd, etc. Greg Signature"What have you got in that paper bag? Is it a dose of Vitamin C? Ain't got no time for Western medicine I am Damo Suzuki" - Mark E Smith > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Linux? What other worthwhile printed resources are out there to start out a > computer-literate but OSX newbie? In earlier days of OS X, porting from Linux was often a pain, but a lot of good stuff now installs with no problems (either a double-clickable installer, or a simple ./configure; make install). X windows is not a default install but is provided with the standard CD/DVD. If you install the optional dev tools you also get the familiar gcc command line options. There are good free news readers, the standard Mail app works well enough, and Firefox is reasonably good (Safari fails on some web scripts though I otherwise prefer it). Apple has extensive free developer documentation. There are <A HREF="http://www.oreilly.com/pub/topic/mac">O'Reilly</a> books, but I have never needed them. I do a good fraction of my research on Linux, and use OS X for mail, web browsing, LaTeX, etc. in large part because it needs little set up and maintanence but more importantly, you don't need to do anything for screen output to be easy on the eye. I gave up finding good graphics drivers for my Linux boxes, so maybe others would have better experience, but actually being able to read a PDF is a big win for me ... And, as others have said, if you end up not liking it, you can always install Linux (replacing OS X, multi-boot, or running in a virtualizer). SignaturePhilip Machanick > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > not a hobbyist any more; I just want stuff to work. My interests are the > usual: e-mail, web news, Usenet, and perl programming. I think you will enjoy OS X. I use Linux and FreeBSD on a number of servers (and have been a Unix user since 1979), and I am very very happy with using OS X as my desktop. > Hence, my interest in the Mac and OSX, and my dilemma. I know that OSX > "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, It is Unix under the hood, but it would be a mistake to say that it is Linux like. > but at a higher level, I feel lost reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. It takes time. I still don't fully grok how various demons are launched. By the time I started to get a handle on SystemStartUp, OS X started migrating to something called launchd. There are other things like that which are OS X specific. But on the other hand, most free software that you are familiar with will compile with a simple ./configure make sudo make install so it will feel like home. (Though I recommend using one of the package management systems, fink or darwinports for managing such things unless you want to manage all the dependencies yourself) > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how > painful was it? I have, and it was easy. > Does O'Reilly publish good stuff for OSX like they do for > Linux? What other worthwhile printed resources are out there to start out a > computer-literate but OSX newbie? I believe that there is something called "OS X for Unix Geeks", but I haven't looked at it myself. -j SignatureJeffrey Goldberg http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/ Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice I rarely read top-posted, over-quoting or HTML postings. I've done the transition, from OS/2, AIX and Linux to OS X, back in 2004. It was my easiest transition -but I've done some-. Linux and OS X are kind 'cousins', then the transition for some things is very easy. None for others. Do yourself a favor, buy 'Mac OS X for Unix Geeks' (http:// www.oreilly.com/catalog/macxtigerunix/), and read http://the.taoofmac.com/space/ and http://www.hawkwings.net/2005/11/20/switching-to-the-mac/. > Do yourself a favor, buy 'Mac OS X for Unix Geeks' (http:// > www.oreilly.com/catalog/macxtigerunix/), and read http://the.taoofmac.com/space/ > and http://www.hawkwings.net/2005/11/20/switching-to-the-mac/. Thanks. That 'Mac OS X for Unix Geeks' seems to be universally recommended. I'll check out the on-line stuff (as well as some URLs from earlier posts) over the next few days. Thanks again. HW SignaturePowered by Slackware 11.0 Linux -- Kernel 2.6.13 News Reader slrn 0.9.8.1 > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > HaroldWho I suggest reading <http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/> which is a description of what Mac OS X is, and is not. There is much else good at <http://www.kernelthread.com>. Bear in mind that Mac OS X is Unix based, not Linux based, and differs in important respects even from its closest Unix bretheren. This can be as simple as different file system layout or different switches to common commands, or as fundamental as IOKit vs /dev. The Kernelthread article may help you decide if Mac OS X suits your needs. ... > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how > painful was it? Sincere thanks for all those thoughtful replies. I am certainly encouraged to make the switch as soon as Leopard comes out. HW SignaturePowered by Slackware 11.0 Linux -- Kernel 2.6.13 News Reader slrn 0.9.8.1 > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities > in perl, etc. SNIP SNIP SNIP SNIP SNIP > > Hence, my interest in the Mac and OSX, and my dilemma. I know that OSX > "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I feel lost > reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. > > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how > painful was it? I tried a friend's Intel Imac with Mac OSX tiger... Not my cup of tea. I dualboot between Mac Os 9.2.2 and Debian Sarge Linux. Even on the Intel Macs you can have both a x86 linux distro and Mac OSX. I use my Imac G3/350 with a registered Graphics Converter 5.9 to finish my Comic Strip "From the Harpy's Desk". which you can donload some of the older ones on my blog page at: <http://pinkrose.dhis.org/newsletter.html> SignatureFrom the Desk of the Sysop of: Planet Maca's Opus, a Free open BBS system. telnet://pinkrose.dhis.org Web Site: http://pinkrose.dhis.org, Dialup 860-618-3091 300-33600 bps The New Cnews maintainer B'ichela > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I feel lost > reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. You may want to read this: http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/ I'd really recommend a Mac, because you say "I just want stuff to work." And if you ever feel you need to look under the hood, a full FreeBSD Microkernel Unix is at your disposal. See http://ccrma.stanford.edu/guides/planetccrma/OS_X.html, especially http://www.finkproject.org/. Or if you wish, you can even run linux on it directly. But I would assume that the availability of many standards etc (like Apache, Perl, PHP, tcl, Ruby and Python) will let you do anything in the Mac OS X. See http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_UNIX_TB.pdf Also interesting possibly, especially for testing: Run any Linux for a PC under www.parallels.com using Intel's virtualization technology - no need to dual boot. Coming up until October: Mac OS X 10.5. Among the very intersting things hopefully there will be ZFS (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/) Hope that gets you started. BTW: The machines like a MacPro or a MacBook Pro are very well built, even if you want to run something else than Mac OS X on them. HTH Marc SignatureSwitzerland/Europe <http://www.heusser.com> remove CHEERS and from MERCIAL to get valid e-mail > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a > power user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, > writing utilities in perl, etc. You probably don't want to compile your own kernel on OS X, but all those other things are no problem. > I find myself growing weary of needing to check many (sometimes old > and conflicting) docs, databases, web pages, and How-To's just to add [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > knows. No graphic arts, no photo editing, no sophisticated sound > editing. OS X comes with a simple but effective mail client with built-in Bayesian spam filtering (Mail); a Web browser based on Konquerer (Safari) and will of course run Firefox, Camino, Opera, etc; a variety of newsreaders are available; and a variety of text editors including various flavors of Emacs, vi/vim, etc. > Hence, my interest in the Mac and OSX, and my dilemma. I know that > OSX "looks like" Linux deep under the hood, but at a higher level, I > feel lost reading, say, the Mac newsgroups. Well, under the hood OS X looks like BSD rather than Linux- because, under the hood, OS X *is* BSD. There is access to the standard command line with your choice of shells, you can run X11 or you can use the OS X Aqua interface. There are multiple choices for installing Unix software through the fink project, OpenDarwin, etc. although the the standard Mac GUI is simpler IMHO to install and delete software. > How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and > how painful was it? Does O'Reilly publish good stuff for OSX like > they do for Linux? What other worthwhile printed resources are out > there to start out a computer-literate but OSX newbie? O'Reilly has published tons of stuff on OS X. http://www.oreilly.com/pub/topic/mac http://www.macdevcenter.com/ including "Mac for (Unix) Geeks" http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/10/22/macforunix.html > of newsreaders are available; and a variety of text editors including > various flavors of Emacs, vi/vim, etc. In fact, emacs is already on there. It's the terminal only version, but I actually use it all the time. There are at least two emacs built specifically for Mac OS using the GUI, which may be worth looking into, but right out of the box, Mac OS has your terminal, shell, emacs, perl, python, etc. Included with the OS are the full compiler and X-win, which the OP may or may not even need. I rarely do. > O'Reilly has published tons of stuff on OS X. > including "Mac for (Unix) Geeks" > http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/10/22/macforunix.html Which is very helpful. The OP may want to take a look at that before plunking down the cash for a Mac, though I figure there's little downside to just buying one - if he doesn't like OS X, he can Bootcamp it into any of several other OSs and still retain the option of switching back to OS X should he learn to love it. SignaturePlain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed. No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow? http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting On May 23, 11:28 am, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote: > In fact, emacs is already on there. It's the terminal only > version, but I actually use it all the time. There are at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > etc. Included with the OS are the full compiler and X-win, > which the OP may or may not even need. I rarely do. I am happy with Aquamacs, which is available free of charge, and the Open Office suite is available for OS X, as well. http://aquamacs.org/ http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/index.php Other software frequently used on Linux is available through the Fink project. http://finkproject.org/ --- Brian On May 23, 11:28 am, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote: > In fact, emacs is already on there. It's the terminal only > version, but I actually use it all the time. There are at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > etc. Included with the OS are the full compiler and X-win, > which the OP may or may not even need. I rarely do. I am happy with Aquamacs, which is available free of charge, and the Open Office suite is available for OS X, as well. http://aquamacs.org/ http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/index.php Other software frequently used on Linux is available through the Fink project. http://finkproject.org/ --- Brian > I am happy with Aquamacs, which is available free of charge, I have found Aquamacs to work pretty well, but I seem to prefer one of several of the Carbon Emacs builds. I'm not sure why. I haven't tried an Aquamacs build in quite a while, though. There is- or was- some controversy about Aquamacs, which appears to be considered a hostile fork to a number of GNU developers working on the standard Emacs distribution. The developer was slammed pretty hard in one of the gnu.emacs groups, it seemed mainly over not being able to fold the code into the main distribution due to GPL stuff and needed diligence about code contributions. I didn't follow all of it, frankly, and maybe it's all been resolved. I have been using Smultron as my primary text editor for some time and find that very good. On May 23, 11:28 am, BreadWithS...@fractious.net wrote: > In fact, emacs is already on there. It's the terminal only > version, but I actually use it all the time. There are at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > etc. Included with the OS are the full compiler and X-win, > which the OP may or may not even need. I rarely do. I am happy with Aquamacs, which is available free of charge, and the Open Office suite is available for OS X, as well. http://aquamacs.org/ http://www.neooffice.org/neojava/en/index.php Other software frequently used on Linux is available through the Fink project. http://finkproject.org/ --- Brian > I am happy with Aquamacs, Good. But enough to hit the Send button three times in a row? ;-) Signature/Jon For contact info, run the following in Terminal: echo 36199371860304980107073482417748002696458P|dc > <brian.b.mcguinn...@lmco.com> wrote: > > I am happy with Aquamacs, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > For contact info, run the following in Terminal: > echo 36199371860304980107073482417748002696458P|dc Sorry about that. I was having trouble with Google Groups; it told me that the message hadn't been sent. I later discovered the extra copies and erased them, but they may still be floating around outside of Google Groups. --- Brian >> <brian.b.mcguinn...@lmco.com> wrote: >> > I am happy with Aquamacs, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Sorry about that. I was having trouble with Google Groups; > it told me that the message hadn't been sent. A lot of people have been reporting this over the past few weeks. > > Sorry about that. I was having trouble with Google Groups; > > it told me that the message hadn't been sent. > > A lot of people have been reporting this over the past few weeks. Multiple posts by Google Groups members has been an ongoing issue for _much_ longer than that. Signature<http://designsbymike.info/shop/mac.cgi> Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.info/shop/musings.cgi> Muckraking T-shirts <http://designsbymike.info/shop/prius.cgi> Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://cafepress.com/comedancing> Ballroom dance shirts & gifts > I've been running Linux since late 1995. I consider myself to be a power > user: compiling kernels, modifying source code for apps, writing utilities [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > HaroldWho Hi, I was Slackware x86 user back in the day. Mac OS X is more like Mach/FreeBSD hybrid OS. The init system etc. are close to BSD and (of course) Slackware. The "hybrid" is the key. You can use the OS as a Mac OS or a complete Unix way, it is entirely your choice. Of course you can mix the environment. The stuff you get "lost" are basically coming from NeXT type of things (Think WindowMaker) and generally actual problems. If you are used to Linux and have some experience with FreeBSD/Slackware, the Unix portion is done :) The Cocoa/Carbon/Others are FrameWorks. .App is complete Next with some classic (Pre OS 10) compatibility. O'Reilly has books for OS X and lets not forget most of the system can be used with a generic Unix/FreeBSD handbook. That is why there aren't thousands of titles dedicated to OS X since the command basically works under OS X. While you are new, there is complete apt-get (Debian) port named Fink and don't forget Apple does not pre-install Developer tools. They think people actually needing them should install with 2 clicks. I understand it makes some purists mad but Apple is a real life/real business company. One thing though. Apple is known to overwrite /etc with their own on some situations files, they warn user on such files and in fact make backup of the user created file before overwriting. I always think it is cost of making a Mach/FreeBSD hybrid a user friendly gui system. So basically it is up to you, you can use OS X just like FreeBSD or you can used it in mixed way. For example I did some layout based stuff on KWord, part of KDE 3.6 just yesterday and output as PDF to my Desktop, used some PDF tools built into OS X to compress it and print. I also dragged/dropped it to a Rapidweaver (rapid HTML site tool) and it appeared at some site. As Ex-Linux (secretly hoping it become a real OS X competitor), I give an example. My keyboard layout is turkish-qwerty on PC. It took 40 mins on every single distro just to set keyboard on OS X which (thanks to our lazy coders) you use archaic Xmodmap . On OS X, my keyboard is Turkish-F Apple variant and I didn't even have to touch any keyboard mappings while loading Fink installed KDE on Apple X11. It basically worked. That is a huge thing for me. Very small but huge. Ilgaz > The "hybrid" is the key. You can use the OS as a Mac OS or a complete > Unix way, it is entirely your choice. Of course you can mix the Just two things that irritated me: 1. Shell commands that don't know resource forks exist 2. GUI programs that can't handle the line-breaks created by shell programs and vice versa SignatureWes Groleau Genealogical Lookups: http://groleau.freeshell.org/ref/lookups.shtml >> The "hybrid" is the key. You can use the OS as a Mac OS or a complete >> Unix way, it is entirely your choice. Of course you can mix the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 2. GUI programs that can't handle the line-breaks created > by shell programs and vice versa Well, cost of Unix and Mac mixed. While some people say it is some opportunist evil thing, I don't agree. You can't tell millions to switch to Unix based computing nor you can't change the decades old Unix programs. Resource fork is basically metadata, Apple had one way or another "metadata" support before it became fashion. I don't understand why people (not you) are against it. I am compiling OpenOffice at background now, do they want _that_ way of directory structure? Can't imagine the chaos and OpenOffice people are wise to use .App architecture for their end user distro. I guess "ditto" or something knows about resources and GUI programs such as Textwrangler (don't miss,freeware) should be able to figure Unix line breaks. Ilgaz >> Just two things that irritated me: >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Well, cost of Unix and Mac mixed. While some people say it is some Of course it is the cost of using a pre-OS X program, or compiling a Unix program without updating for HFS+ But it is not a cost in the sense of "you want Unix and Mac, this is what you _must_ tolerate. As BBEdit and Textedit show, an Aqua program CAN handle different types of line endings. And as ditto and rsync show, a shell program CAN handle resource forks. I think Apple just goofed on ls, tar, cp, and the like. Compiled them without sufficient thought about the implications. Just likem on the things they _did_ think about and change, they neglected to say so in the man pages. SignatureWes Groleau "Beware the barrenness of a busy life." -- George Verwer > I think Apple just goofed on ls, tar, cp, and the like. Compiled them > without sufficient thought about the implications. Just likem on the > things they _did_ think about and change, they neglected to say so in > the man pages. Many of these apps are covered by POSIX. If you want to add non-standard crap to them, then you'll end up with an OS like Linsux or Windoze. Shudder. A bientot Paul > <groleau+news@freeshell.org> wrote: >> I think Apple just goofed on ls, tar, cp, and the like. Compiled them [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Many of these apps are covered by POSIX. If you want to add non-standard > crap to them, then you'll end up with an OS like Linsux or Windoze. HFS+ is "standard" ? If you are going to market an O.S. that is flaky unless on HFS+, then the tools that come with it shouldn't be tools that only work right on UFS. SignatureWes Groleau ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ A UNIX signature isn't a return address, it's the ASCII equivalent ^ ^ of a black velvet clown painting. It's a rectangle of carets ^ ^ surrounding a quote from a literary giant of weeniedom like ^ ^ Heinlein or Dr. Who. ^ ^ -- Chris Maeda ^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > And as ditto and rsync show, a shell program CAN handle resource forks. > > I think Apple just goofed on ls, tar, cp, and the like. Compiled them > without sufficient thought about the implications. Just likem on the > things they _did_ think about and change, they neglected to say so in > the man pages. cp and mv *do* support resource forks (since Tiger) and with ls you can get to the resource fork of a file named "filename.txt" with something like "ls -l filename.txt/rsrc". Jochem Signature"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > cp and mv *do* support resource forks (since Tiger) and with ls you can Yes. Apple realized they had screwed up and fixed it. Don't you wish Microsoft would do that more often? > get to the resource fork of a file named "filename.txt" with something > like "ls -l filename.txt/rsrc". A hack, but better than nothing. Doesn't help with sending a directory to 'tar' or 'cpio' or doing a directory 'ls' or a wildcard 'mv' or 'cp' (Fortunately, there's 'ditto') SignatureWes Groleau "Lewis's case for the existence of God is fallacious." "You mean like circular reasoning?" "He believes in God. Therefore, he's fallacious." > A hack, but better than nothing. Doesn't help with sending > a directory to 'tar' or 'cpio' or doing a directory 'ls' or > a wildcard 'mv' or 'cp' (Fortunately, there's 'ditto') Yes, the support has its limits. But you can do a wildcard cp or mv and the resource forks are copied/moved, too. What really sucks is that rsync support is still buggy (there are third-party patches, but one would expect Apple to do its homework). Jochem Signature"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery > Yes, the support has its limits. But you can do a wildcard cp or mv and > the resource forks are copied/moved, too. What really sucks is that I'll have to look at that again, but in 10.3 it seemed like that did not happen. > rsync support is still buggy (there are third-party patches, but one > would expect Apple to do its homework). The patched rsync that comes with RsyncX works perfectly in 10.3.9 It's how I do my backups. SignatureWes Groleau There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person could believe in them. -- George Orwell ... >> How many of you out there have made the switch from Linux to OSX, and how >> painful was it? ... >> HaroldWho > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Mach/FreeBSD hybrid OS. The init system etc. are close to BSD and (of > course) Slackware. [remainder snipped] > Ilgaz Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed reply to my post. At this point I'm pretty sure that I'm going to make the switch at the end of the year (unless Leopard gets delayed again). Maybe by then I'll be able to remember what all that Carbon, Cocoa, Darwin, etc stuff means :-) Thanks again, HW SignaturePowered by Slackware 11.0 Linux -- Kernel 2.6.13 News Reader slrn 0.9.8.1 > Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed reply to my post. At this point > I'm pretty sure that I'm going to make the switch at the end of the year > (unless Leopard gets delayed again). > > Maybe by then I'll be able to remember what all that Carbon, Cocoa, Darwin, > etc stuff means :-) If not, you know where to find us. : ) SignatureJR |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.