Good to know. The only "Drawback" I find is that hfs (normal just plain hfs) support is not pressent since in Mac OS X 10.6 it was moved to the kernel for read-only support. but that is solvable with hfsutils making it a recommendation (or just forking and modernising it).
But just for hfs+ for me work ok. 2017-05-19 19:15 GMT-04:00 Rogério Brito <[email protected]>: > Thanks, for pointing me out to this package from fedora. > > I didn't know that it exist. I will check it out and update the package > with adaptations for Debian. > > > PS: please, excuse the brevity of this message, but it was composed on my > phone. > > -- > Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA > http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito > DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br > > Em 19 de mai de 2017 18:11, "Pablo Roberto Lezaeta Reyes" < > [email protected]> escreveu: > >> 2016-02-08 15:54 GMT-03:00 Rogério Brito <[email protected]>: >> >>> Hi there. >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:32 AM, Pablo Lezaeta Reyes <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > There is any issue preventing at least try updating the package? >>> >>> Yes. The patches don't apply, the update of a new version needs very >>> heavy surgery, and this is akin to the maintenance of a full-blown >>> fork of the package. >>> >>> I already asked for help with the package. Please, see: >>> >>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557892 >>> >>> > Maybe providing more insingn in the problem could help us help you get >>> the >>> > apropiate update >>> >>> I'd appreciate it if you (and other people) could help get the program >>> updated. >>> >>> > or at least if you aren't going to update you could backport security >>> patchs >>> > and things. >>> >>> Are there any security issues that are solved in later releases and >>> that apply to the current version in Debian? I'd love to be notified >>> of those. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Rogério Brito. >>> >>> -- >>> Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA >>> http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito >>> DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br >>> >> >> >> >> >> Hi. >> >> So many moons since I dont talk about this but I was bussy. >> So lets return with all i find. >> >> Fedora is packageing a package called *hfsplus-tools* [1] at version >> 540.1.linux3 at first look look like a fork of hfsprogs and if you look is >> somekind a fork but not in the traditional sence. >> I did some testing and efectively is just an adaptation of hfsprogs to a >> newer version (540.1) at the moment of creation of it. >> >> So we somekind solve our problem of an now 10yo version... somekind since >> it still old compared with lastest 589 [2] but at least it have security >> upgrades and I think is still compatible with latest hfs+ disk >> >> So now the question is you will use this package (either keeping the >> name, changin it to upstream name or using fedora name) or not? anyway it >> need test sure and probably could land in Debian X. >> >> [1] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/hfsplus-tools >> [2] https://opensource.apple.com/source/diskdev_cmds/diskdev_cmds-589/ >> >> -- >> *Pablo Lezaeta* >> > -- *Pablo Lezaeta*
