On Monday, April 2, 2001, at 03:34 AM, John W Baxter wrote:
> At 1:28 -0400 4/2/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I haven't yet seen any official recommendations on which
>> type of partition to use, though.
>>
>
> I have the distinct impression (whose source I don't remember...perhaps
> Apple's J
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, John W Baxter ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The case-sensitive file system would be one obvious point of
conflict.
That's an excellent point, and one which could very well be the
cause of all the compatibility problems. I hadn't realized that
with my mac-extended startu
At 1:28 -0400 4/2/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I haven't yet seen any official recommendations on which
>type of partition to use, though.
>
I have the distinct impression (whose source I don't remember...perhaps
Apple's John Cambra in his Mac OS X dog and pony show March 14 at (Seattle)
dBUG, p
On Monday, April 2, 2001, at 01:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just to put in my experience:
>
<...>
> I haven't yet seen any official recommendations on which
> type of partition to use, though.
>
>
I believe that the recommendation is to use HFS+.
I've just had better luck w/ UFS.
Fore
Just to put in my experience:
(Using a G3 266 PB 128MB/4GB):
I installed OSX twice using a Unix formatted partion, and
OSX was extremely sluggish and practically useless.
Attempting to run Classic mode (from another partition)
resulted in a "can't mount this startup disk" error. I almost
thr
On 4/1/01 11:21 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I thought maybe the problem is that they were "Carbonized Classic Mac OS"
> applications and not truly Mac OS X "Native" apps and somehow depended on
> the HFS file structure. As I said before, I thought it might be a stupid
>
on 4/1/01 10:23 PM, Ian Ragsdale at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Pepper is definitely carbon - it runs on OS 9 as well.
That's cool, I never tried to install it on OS 9.
The Appleworks and Fetch installers worked fine when I did a standard OS X
install with OS 9 preinstalled. When I reinstalled O
Your definitions are correct, but carbon apps can come in two forms. If you
are careful in writing your carbon app, and compile it in PEF format, it can
run in OS 9 as well as OS X. If you compile into Mach-O, you can use some
native services that you can't with PEF, and it will only run in OS X,
Apparently I need some clarification of terms. I thought these were the
definitions:
carbon: will run on OS X without needing the classic environment
cocoa: uses a specific OS X application framework
classic: will run under OS < 9, but not OS X
So checking whether something is "carbon" shoul
Pepper is definitely carbon - it runs on OS 9 as well.
Ian
On 4/1/01 8:48 PM, "Bill Stephenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> PhotoLine and Pepper both work well on either format, but they're not really
> "Carbon" apps are they?
On Sunday, April 1, 2001, at 09:48 PM, Bill Stephenson wrote:
> This is probably a stupid question but, do "Carbon" apps NOT run on OS
> X if
> the disk has been formatted for unix when OS X was installed?
>
NO, they should work just fine. Classic apps will need to on a HFS+
partition tho.
>
This is probably a stupid question but, do "Carbon" apps NOT run on OS X if
the disk has been formatted for unix when OS X was installed?
So far I have not abeen able to get either Appleworks or fetch to install
since I reinstalled OS X with a unix disk format.
Fetch complains that it can't inst
12 matches
Mail list logo
