Anyone with Unix File System Probs?

in macOS edited January 2014
I tried using the Unix File System when I clean installed 10.2 last weekend and the first thing that failed was Windows Media Player install. I told me that I had no drive. Anyone else have any problems as such? Anyone know why such problems arise? Shouldn't the file system be transparent to the OS? ( Could this maybe be due to the fact that the drive was named ' / ' by Jaguar install? )

Linux can use any number of file systems. As long as the kernel has the support compiled into it, or a loadable module. The actual programs don't see a difference. Can't OSX do this?

This isn't a tech help type question. I reinstalled yet a second time with Mac Extended FS, but I am wondering why Unix FS didn't work. And if anyone else had similar problems.


  • Reply 1 of 1
    The answer is simple. UFS doesn't support resource forks by it's nature. Windows Media Player is a carbonized app that uses Resourceforks and thus cannot be used on a UFS drive. UFS is for special uses only, mainly servers, like Apache that don't use resource forked files. YOUR use of UFS was just inappropriate for the filesystem It's not a fault of the FS! / is the default mount point of the root device. You can't name a UFS root device, "/" by UNIX definition.

    It's quite ok, that the app does see a difference since it's files couldn't be stored on the FS you chose to store them on.

    Mac OS X has support for numerous filesystems. They don'T need to be compiled into the kernel since we don'T have a monolithic kernel like Linux but an expandable architecture through BSD.

    Have a look at /System/Library/Filesystems !
Sign In or Register to comment.