Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

kext.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#11

Post by stonogo »

ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

All attempts at such will fail. vfat won because it works in Windows without additional drivers. Anything you come up with to replace it will also have to work in Windows without additional drivers.

It will also have have a workable implementation in what is essentially equivalent to the public domain, and be simple enough to process that hardware manufacturers can read it with a microcontroller.

I would love to see it happen, but I am not optimistic.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#13

Post by raimue »

In order to deploy and run your own kernel extensions on recent versions of the Mac operating system you will need to disable System Integrity Protection (SIP). Otherwise you will need a paid Apple developer account and ask Apple for a special codesigning certificate for kernel extensions.

https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/Se...

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#14

Post by duaneb »

stonogo wrote: post #11
ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

All attempts at such will fail. vfat won because it works in Windows without additional drivers. Anything you come up with to replace it will also have to work in Windows without additional drivers. It will also have have a workable implementation in what is essentially equivalent to the public domain, and be simple enough to process that hardware manufacturers can read it with a microcontroller. I would love to see…

vfat only won in the sense that if you're forced to use windows you still have to use vfat. In every other context there is a better option. I haven't needed to move files to a windows box in 15 years so—to me—it's a massive surprise anyone still uses it at all.

Just don't use USB keys; they're terrible security-wise and you're forced to use technology built for your grandmother.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#15

Post by djsumdog »

ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

I think today it's exFat instead of vfat. That seems to be supported by a lot of phones and devices for large storage.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#16

Post by stonogo »

duaneb wrote: post #14
stonogo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All attempts at such will fail. vfat won because it works in Windows without additional drivers. Anything you come up with to replace it will also have to work in Windows without additional drivers. It will also have have a workable implementation in what is essentially equivalent to the public domain, and be simple enough to process that hardware manufacturers can read it with a microcontroller. I would love to see…

vfat only won in the sense that if you're forced to use windows you still have to use vfat. In every other context there is a better option. I haven't needed to move files to a windows box in 15 years so—to me—it's a massive surprise anyone still uses it at all. Just don't use USB keys; they're terrible security-wise and you're forced to use technology built for your grandmother.

That is the only sense in which a 'universal file system' can win. There is no other context. Your personal usage habits are completely irrelevant ("I haven't had to shoot a gun since the first gulf war, so to me it's a massive surprise that anyone still fights wars at all.")

I don't use USB keys. I don't have any windows systems. But I do have UEFI, and that is based on FAT as well. Disregarding my grandmother's technical prowess, this technology is here to stay, and sticking your head in the sand about it doesn't advance any causes.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#17

Post by RayDonnelly »

wmf wrote: post #12
ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

You could call it a universal disk format. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Disk_Format

I tried UDF for a few months on a macOS/Linux/Windows triple boot. It doesn't work reliably enough. I've switched to ext2 using e2fsd and Paragon (which I paid for) on Windows and macOS respectively. Fingers crossed.

I wish someone would port F2FS to Windows and macOS. This could be a good starting point for macOS.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#18

Post by chungy »

Sophistifunk wrote: post #9
DigitalJack wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty soon, we'll just use XKCD numbers and not bother linking. We'll just call something or other "hey, that's a 927"

We should create a URI standard for that; xkcd://927

Should be simple enough: https://github.com/chungy/xkcd-uri

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#19

Post by wruza »

djsumdog wrote: post #15
ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

I think today it's exFat instead of vfat. That seems to be supported by a lot of phones and devices for large storage.

exFAT suddenly dirty-dismounts both on windows and osx, and is hard to mount again for regular user. Tried it as common r/w storage for bootcamp -- complete trash, cannot be used for long-connected drives, hyperactive torrents, big files. Copying some files forth-back is okay though.

Re: A Base Filesystem Project for macOS

#20

Post by loeg »

djsumdog wrote: post #15
ianai wrote: post #4

Just yesterday I was thinking how all of the platforms are still using vfat as a go between. There really should be a new FS "for them all"

I think today it's exFat instead of vfat. That seems to be supported by a lot of phones and devices for large storage.

No, exFat is patent encumbered and isn't as simple and well documented as vfat (so non-Windows implementations are worse). vfat is still the common denominator.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT#Restrictive_licensing_an...

Post reply on HN