On Mar 31, 11:42 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (W B Hacker) wrote: > > Unfortunately not. > > I used hfs+ for several months, and (coming off hpfs-386, jfs, and ufs) was > convinced it was naught but the dying embers of the 'Woz machine' era.
Unfortunate indeed. Your metaphor may be cute, but what you're saying makes absolutely no sense. Apple's HFS and Apple's HFS+ are different, you realize that, right? > Yes and no. Case-preserving (finally) yes. Sort of. By default, HFS+ is case preserving. There is a *case sensitive* variant called HFSX.
