Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Run OSX apps on a Unix file system Apps
Want to NOT run Classic, and have a UNIX filesystem? Getting can't install on a Network server error? For those of you who installed OSX with a Unix filesystem (UFS) and now have trouble installing/ running OSX apps like Mozilla 0.95 or Quicken 2002 (OSX version), here's a workaround.

Use diskcopy (in the utilities folder) and create a blank image file, sized appropriately for the application in question. Example, I created 30 meg blank disk image, using Mac HFS extended, and then just copied the 24.5 Meg Mozilla folder over to the mounted disk image. Mozilla runs fine now. Did the same thing for Quicken 2002, and the installer was perfectly happy writing to the HFS disk image.

Seems many of the app programmers, in their rush to get these apps to market, haven't really ported all the file I/O routines to the Darwin OS calls.

Well, this is a work around at the expense of some disk space. One nice benefit is I can copy my quicken data and programs from my OSX laptop to my OS9 desktop with one file image, and back.
    •    
  • Currently 4.33 / 5
  You rated: 3 / 5 (3 votes cast)
 
[4,366 views]  

Run OSX apps on a Unix file system | 2 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Run OSX apps on a Unix file system' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
why?
Authored by: bhines on Oct 23, '01 03:09:28AM

And the advantage is... what?

So far i have seen no compelling reason to use UFS as a main partition, and MANY reasons why it is a bad idea (even apple says not to). Everything I have read says "if you need UFS for some reason, make a separate UFS partition". Those same sources explain how UFS is actually slower than HFS+.

The reason these apps don't work has nothing to do with new "file system calls", and everything to do with using resource forks. Moving all your resources out of the resource fork can be a LOT of work.



[ Reply to This | # ]
why?
Authored by: wshppp on Oct 23, '01 12:17:14PM

Well, actually, having run both, the UFS filesystem performance is excellent on 10.1,
and much more stable than HFS. If you use HFS, Apple recommends you clean
an HFS filesystem once a week. There are a lot of reason to use UFS over HFS,
peformance, security (read real permissions), stability, etc. Apple will eventually
do away with HFS, just they will with classic.

Bill



[ Reply to This | # ]