Re: linux on HFS? why not HPFS instead?

Matthias Urlichs (
Mon, 6 May 1996 22:04:26 +0100

In, article <Pine.LNX.3.91.960505013422.874C-100000@br=
Kevin M Bealer <> writes:
> I have seen read-only HPFS utilities for DOS, (back when I was into O=
> and from the instructions it was implied that _reading_ a HPFS partit=
ion was
> not bad, but that _writing_ to one was difficult... as if there was s=
> really messy programming that had to be done to get everything back i=
n the
> right place.
Right. HPFS (and HFS for the Mac, incidentally), use something like B-t=
to organize their data. These trees are _very_ easy to read, but writin=
and deleting them is rather difficult and can run into all kinds of wei=
problems. For instance, you might have a three-level tree, and an inser=
might split that three all the way to the top, and add a fourth level.
Unfortunately, halfway through somebody else allocates all the free spa=
and you have to undo everything.

> (of course, you could use a dos partition that everyone cvan read.)
That's ugly, too...

It sure has been a pleasure for us to broadcast for the sailors and
soldiers; besides, it's part of the National Defense Program to prepare
our boys for anything.
-- Bob Hope
Matthias Urlichs \ Noris Network GmbH i.Gr/ Xlink-POP N=FCrnberg=
Schleiermacherstra=DFe 12 \ Linux+Internet / EMail: urlichs@nor=
90491 N=FCrnberg (Germany) \ Consulting+Programming+Networking+etc'i=
PGP: 1024/4F578875 1B 89 E2 1C 43 EA 80 44 15 D2 29 CF C6 C7 E0 DE=
Click <A HREF=3D"">here</A>. =