On Tue, 22 May 2001, Cameron Berkenpas wrote: > OS X supports UFS? Which UFS? As in FFS (which open/net/free use)? That's > pretty cool but I figured OS X would have some nifty brand new filesystem.
Apple's "nifty brand new filesystem" is HFS+, which they have made the default on all MacOS 9/ X installations. However, OS X also supports the UFS filesystem of its NeXTSTEP ancestry. This shares common UFS ancestry with the Berkeley FFS, but is not fully compatible. See below... > Linux can mount UFS/FFS partitions, and read-write support is > available. But I STRONGLY suggest mounting FFS/UFS partitions > read-only, you can damage the filesystem, and in fact, I have. I've > not damaged a BSD file system, though, if I open a file in a text > editor it tends to corrupt the file (like half the file will be gone). > I have killed solaris filesystems through linux though... Which is of > course a UFS, and I don't know really much at all about OS X's file > system. You've been warned. Not all UFS/FFS are equal. The Linux kernel docs have some info at Documentation/filesystems/ufs.txt: <http://lxr.linux.no/source/Documentation/filesystems/ufs.txt?v=2.4.4>