3 ms·
Just a couple of points. 1) .DS_Store is necessary for compatibility with UNIX/Windows who do not support the HFS+ resource fork/Finder metadata. There is no w
by taligent 14y ago
Just a couple of points.
1) .DS_Store is necessary for compatibility with UNIX/Windows who do not support the HFS+ resource fork/Finder metadata. There is no way around it and they are optional. Perhaps just add it to your .gitignore like everyone else does.
2) ZFS is unnecessary. Most of the use cases that haven't already been solved elsewhere e.g. Time Machine/Versions are only for super-advanced users. In which case they can download ZFS from a third party. Not to mention that the trend is overwhelmingly towards cloud storage.
3) Splitting iTunes into its parts is not necessarily the best answer. How do you handle syncing ? System wide syncing e.g. iSync was a colossal mess and confused the daylights out of people. Also how do you handle the store ? Separate stores in each app doesn't sound fun.
- eli 14y agoIt's a list of feature requestes; none of this is necessary. But ZFS would be very nice to have.
- batista 14y agoWhy? Do you have half a SSD to spare for checksums and additional metadata? Or does the common OS X user have several disks that he wants to see as a logical volume, while also understanding the risks after one of the dies? Do they even have the storage redundancy needed?
- eli 14y agoDo I want the option to trade disk space for greatly increased reliability? You betcha. Also, snapshotting.
- batista 14y agoSingle drive reliability means nothing. In a SSD, doubly so. ZFS won't kill the need for external backups, even in the least.
- eli 14y agoWho said anything about replacing external backups?
- batista 14y agoYou wrote about "greatly increased reliability". Which you don't get at all out of your 1-disk laptop/iMac with ZFS. For this use case, both filesystems as just as (un)reliable: a simple disk failure and you're out. So, all reliability comes, as before, from backups, not from anything fs inherent. You only get to see the ZFS advantage in a much larger, multi-disk setup.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jackalope 14y agoIn what way is .DS_Store necessary? Littering files in visited directories is an unacceptable and offensive way to store user-specific preferences. Put that crap in ~/.finder or something similar. If .DS_Store is a dependency of HFS+, that's enough reason for me to wish for a filesystem replacement. I don't care if it's ZFS or not. Obviously, there's a lot of hate for .DS_Store and there has been for years. That Apple has never addressed this is a sore point for a lot of people.