3 ms·
Never understood why it had to be in the same folder. Can’t the os have its own little db somewhere that has a reference to each path?
by seabass 2y ago
Never understood why it had to be in the same folder. Can’t the os have its own little db somewhere that has a reference to each path?
- stereo 2y agoThe idea was that metadata, for example a file’s label, would travel across to whichever device you use the network drive from.
- jojobas 2y agoYeah, because such devices are only made by Apple and can or should understand Apple's internal format.
- tambourine_man 2y agoBut classic Mac OS stored “Desktop DB” and “Desktop DF” at the root of each mounted drive, IIRC. It seems like a better solution.
- neerajsi 2y agoPutting in in the folder is also nice in that it naturally gets deleted when the folder is deleted
- earthboundkid 2y agoAll file operations have been watched by Spotlight since forever at this point.
- threeseed 2y agoExcept for ignored file types and folders you marked as private.
- vetinari 2y agoOr those on network volumes or removable media. When somebody else on other machine removes them, your local database is out of sync pronto.
- earthboundkid 2y agoThis also happens with .DS_store files if the other computer on the network isn’t a Mac. It’s irrelevant.
- tekknik 2y agocomputers other than a mac don’t need DS_Store anyways, so still relevant.
- earthboundkid 2y agoNo, the objection to not keeping .DS_Store per folder and doing it per file system instead was that a non-Mac might make changes that would not be seen. The point is that this can already happen for a lot of different reasons! So keeping it per folder doesn't eliminate the failure mode, it just makes it slightly less common… at the cost of annoying all non-Mac users and any Mac user who needs to interact with Git etc. The tradeoff analysis for doing it per folder is bad.