Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Case Sensitive HFS+ in Tiger Client?

Case Sensitive HFS+ in Tiger Client?
Thread Tools
Agent69
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 09:35 AM
 
I know that Panther server has the option of formating the hard disk in case sensitive HFS+. Has Apple included it as an option with Tiger client? (I know most people here don't care about it but I prefer a case sensitive file system.)
Agent69
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 09:52 AM
 
The option is probably present, but I really hope they don't make it the default. The usability problems with case-sensitivity are way too severe to introduce as the default options.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
KraziKid
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 10:20 AM
 
While I am a proponent of case sensitive file systems, it would not be a good think for Mac OS X. So many programs out their assume case insensitivity, that they would fail to work properly if Apple allowed the normal user to choose it. Now, if Apple forced case sensitivity from the beginning (meaning Mac OS 10.0), and/or lets dev's know what in advance of their intentions, then it might work.
15 inch MacBook Pro 2.16 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 7200 RPM 100GB HDD.

Dual 2.5 GHz Power Mac G5, 1 GB RAM, 250 GB HDD, ATI Radeon X800XT.
     
larkost
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: San Jose, Ca
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 12:30 PM
 
Out of curiosity, why would you want a case sensitive filesystem (as opposed to case preserving)? Most of the projects that had problems with this have long since been straightened out (what is the difference between POD and pod?), and I have never heard a good argument for case sensitivity as a feature, the reasons have always come down to "because x did it that way" (or defunct arguments like needing extra processor cycles).
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 02:43 PM
 
Yeah, I imagine it would be an unnecessary complication to place such an option in the regular version of OS X. Apple chose to have a case preserving filesystem for the client and there's little reason to alter that now.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
absmiths
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Edmond, OK USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 03:29 PM
 
I find it annoying that the filesystem is case insensitive but most command-line tools I use are not. E.G., if you use tcsh (maybe bash too), tab-completion only works if the case is exactly right. Also, invoking Ls won't work, but ls does. Similarly, in MySQL tab autocompletion only works if you type everything lowercase, regardless of whether the table name has caps in it. The MySQL behavior is I believe a by-product of the filesystem - the exact same version on Linux behaves differently.
     
Angus_D
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 03:41 PM
 
There's nothing to stop you formatting as case-sensitive HFSX in Panther Client using newfs_hfs with the -s flag. I guess it's not exposed through the GUI as it's not really needed for the majority of end-users.
     
larkost
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: San Jose, Ca
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 9, 2004, 06:38 PM
 
absmiths: you might want to ckeck out this article at MacOS X Hints.
     
Agent69  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 10, 2004, 03:06 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
The option is probably present, but I really hope they don't make it the default. The usability problems with case-sensitivity are way too severe to introduce as the default options.
I don't want case sensitivity to be the default option; too many users would be adversely effected by such a change. I just want the option of having it.
Agent69
     
wadesworld
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 10, 2004, 09:19 PM
 
I don't find the lack of case sensitivity to be a big issue either, and it probably is better for the majority of users to leave it like it is.

When I've needed to compile the occassional Unix project that uses something like INSTALL and install, while that's incredibly stupid, it's simple just to put it on a UFS disk image and work from there, so it's not worth getting worked up about.

Wade
     
Agent69  (op)
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 02:45 PM
 
Originally posted by wadesworld:
When I've needed to compile the occassional Unix project that uses something like INSTALL and install, while that's incredibly stupid, it's simple just to put it on a UFS disk image and work from there, so it's not worth getting worked up about.
The real problem is that programs written for Unix-like operating systems expect the OS to actually behave like a Unix-like operating system; which includes case sensitivity.
Agent69
     
Wevah
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: State of Denial
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 03:09 PM
 
Originally posted by absmiths:
E.G., if you use tcsh (maybe bash too), tab-completion only works if the case is exactly right.
Try adding this to your .tcshrc:

set complete = enhance

Of course, this has some other effects that might not be desirable (check the manpage).

Edit: Nevermind, it's already been mentioned.
[Wevah setPostCount:[Wevah postCount] + 1];
     
Rainy Day
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oregon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 04:01 PM
 
Originally posted by larkost:
Out of curiosity, why would you want a case sensitive filesystem
Security is one reason. Although this particular problem has been identified and fixed, the probability of similar yet unidentified exploits is uncomfortably high.

Personally (from a user's perspective) i don't view case insensitivity as either a feature or asset. I have used both kinds of systems, and know most people can get used to either (usually accompanied by a little grumbling when making the transition). Each have their advantages and disadvantages.

My personal opinion is that when Apple decided to move the MacOS on top of a UNIX foundation (a case sensitive OS), they should have also made the transition to case sensitivity in the MacOS. In truth, they might not have been able to make the switch at that time because it would have caused too many compatibility issues with Classic emulation, reading HFS disks, etc. But i would favor an eventual migration.
     
jasong
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Allston, MA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 08:41 PM
 
I think it should be the default setting. This way we can make the hide extensions default too and have folders with the following contents:

Document (Document.doc)
Document (Document.ppt)
document (document.doc)
document (document.ppt)

-- Jason
     
neoTony
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 10:39 PM
 
Originally posted by jasong:
I think it should be the default setting. This way we can make the hide extensions default too and have folders with the following contents:

Document (Document.doc)
Document (Document.ppt)
document (document.doc)
document (document.ppt)

-- Jason
... *shudder*
     
Brass
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2004, 11:03 PM
 
Originally posted by jasong:
I think it should be the default setting. This way we can make the hide extensions default too and have folders with the following contents:

Document (Document.doc)
Document (Document.ppt)
document (document.doc)
document (document.ppt)

-- Jason
Well put! I think Apple chose wisely for the sake of less confusion for the average users.

Except of course for the extensions bit. I still can't believe they went down the DOS road of using file extensions instead fo some sort of metadata. I should be able to name my files whatever I want. but that a rant for another thread *sigh*
     
Rainy Day
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oregon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2004, 12:04 AM
 
Originally posted by Brass:
I still can't believe they went down the DOS road of using file extensions
They didn't. Loooong before there was an evil empire in Redmond, WA, there were extensions. File extensions go so far back even God can't remember for sure when they came about.

The dark forces never innovate. Even before Windoze they were "borrowing" ideas from others. MS-DOS was a cheap rip-off of an OS called CP/M, which itself was a poorman's OS-8 (the 1960's OS of DEC's PDP-8 mini-computer). But file extensions were around even before that. Even before there was a UNIX. File extensions go way, way, way back.

Personally, i see MacOS X's proclivity toward file extensions over MacOS metadata as an unnecessary regression. (You can thank the NeXT boys, who never really understood the Mac, for that one.) Better to have lost the file extensions but kept case sensitivity, IMO. YMMV.
     
Brass
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2004, 12:22 AM
 
Originally posted by Rainy Day:
They didn't. Loooong before there was an evil empire in Redmond, WA, there were extensions. File extensions go so far back even God can't remember for sure when they came about.

The dark forces never innovate. Even before Windoze they were "borrowing" ideas from others. MS-DOS was a cheap rip-off of an OS called CP/M, which itself was a poorman's OS-8 (the 1960's OS of DEC's PDP-8 mini-computer). But file extensions were around even before that. Even before there was a UNIX. File extensions go way, way, way back.

Personally, i see MacOS X's proclivity toward file extensions over MacOS metadata as an unnecessary regression. (You can thank the NeXT boys, who never really understood the Mac, for that one.) Better to have lost the file extensions but kept case sensitivity, IMO. YMMV.
You are correct, but Windows (DOS+) was the first to really use the filename as a filetype metadata instrisically. Ie, previously people had given files extensions to remind themselves what type of file they were. And applications gave files default extensions to indicate to users what kind of files they were. But DOS (and probably it's predecessors such as CP/M) really enforced this (8.3 name format) and Windows was the first (that I know of) to use the file name as metadata for the purpose of deciding which application to use when attempting to open a file directly.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:32 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,