Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:03 PM, Ron McDowell wrote: > Everybody here is so friendly! > > I know how to use tar, patrick. Having a tarball on that drive that I then > have to untar to the local [ffs|hfs] seems kind of redundant, inelegant and > just plain crufty. > > -- > Ron McDowell > San Antonio TX > > SUN and SGI systems have been far worse. I have had to use tar in the past just to move data between drives mounted on the same system. This was due to differing block sizes. forget "cp -r " my only choice was: tar cf - oldstuff/* | (cd /newstuff/; tar xf -;) tar IS your best friend until you have to preserve resource forks...
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Ron McDowell wrote: > patrick keshishian wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote: >> >>> >>> A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition >>> to >>> a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted on an >>> OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS >>> 8-character-dot-3-character naming convention got mapped to all >>> uppercase. >>> Played hell with some of my source trees. :( >>> >> >> learn to use tar(1). >> >> --patrick >> >> > > Everybody here is so friendly! > > I know how to use tar, patrick. Having a tarball on that drive that I then > have to untar to the local [ffs|hfs] seems kind of redundant, inelegant and > just plain crufty. but copying files to a limiting fs such as FAT32 is what, elegant? You are obviously using the usb stick/drive as a transport medium. The form in which you transfer data in that medium should be one that preserves the integrity of said data best possible. tar(1) will provide that integrity. --patrick
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 23:14:19 -0500, Ron McDowell wrote: >Ted Roby wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: >> >> >>> I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and >>> still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus >>> partition. >>> >>>-Otto >>> >>> >> >> >> This is more in line with what I am seeking. >> I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from >> hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist >> with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large >> SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy >> all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, >> copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as >> backups. >> >> My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus >> access on i386 for future Mac migrators. >> > >A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition >to a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted >on an OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS >8-character-dot-3-character naming convention got mapped to all >uppercase. Played hell with some of my source trees. :( > >I'm not sure if that happened on the OSX write to the FAT32 drive or on >the OpenBSD read from the drive... but it's not going to do what I want. mount that stick on OpenBSD using "mount_msdos -l " and I'd bet you have no more problems. > >So yes, Ted, I'd like very much to be able to mount an intel Snow >Leopard hfs+ file system on OpenBSD. Maybe you won't need it now ;-) R/ *** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I subscribed to the list. Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to reply off list. Thankyou. Rod/ --- This life is not the real thing. It is not even in Beta. If it was, then OpenBSD would already have a man page for it.
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
patrick keshishian wrote: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote: A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition to a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted on an OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS 8-character-dot-3-character naming convention got mapped to all uppercase. Played hell with some of my source trees. :( learn to use tar(1). --patrick Everybody here is so friendly! I know how to use tar, patrick. Having a tarball on that drive that I then have to untar to the local [ffs|hfs] seems kind of redundant, inelegant and just plain crufty. -- Ron McDowell San Antonio TX
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Ron McDowell wrote: > Ted Roby wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: >> >> >>> >>> I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and >>> still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus >>> partition. >>> >>> -Otto >>> >>> >> >> >> This is more in line with what I am seeking. >> I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from >> hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist >> with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large >> SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy >> all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, >> copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as >> backups. >> >> My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus >> access on i386 for future Mac migrators. >> > > A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition to > a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted on an > OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS > 8-character-dot-3-character naming convention got mapped to all uppercase. > Played hell with some of my source trees. :( learn to use tar(1). --patrick > I'm not sure if that happened on the OSX write to the FAT32 drive or on the > OpenBSD read from the drive... but it's not going to do what I want. > > So yes, Ted, I'd like very much to be able to mount an intel Snow Leopard > hfs+ file system on OpenBSD. > > -- > Ron McDowell > San Antonio TX
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
Ted Roby wrote: On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus partition. -Otto This is more in line with what I am seeking. I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as backups. My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus access on i386 for future Mac migrators. A note of caution. I copied a bunch of stuff from an OSX 10.6 partition to a FAT32 USB drive, and when looking at that FAT32 USB drive mounted on an OpenBSD 4.7 system, any filenames that fit into the old DOS 8-character-dot-3-character naming convention got mapped to all uppercase. Played hell with some of my source trees. :( I'm not sure if that happened on the OSX write to the FAT32 drive or on the OpenBSD read from the drive... but it's not going to do what I want. So yes, Ted, I'd like very much to be able to mount an intel Snow Leopard hfs+ file system on OpenBSD. -- Ron McDowell San Antonio TX
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 5:12 PM, bofh wrote: > Would be hfs porters should also know that snow leopard (10.6) made > further extensions to hfs+ and there can be data in a file created on > 10.6 that even 10.5 can't see. > > Yes. This is why my 10.5 system tools broke, and those third party companies do not care to update. I have provided tech support for MacOS far longer than I have ever cared to actually use it. I can: 1. Learn to develop on Apple. (I'll stick with C, thanks) 2. Turn my Apple into a fink. (screw you stallman) (I'll stick with C, thanks) 3. Learn to develop on OpenBSD. (I'll stick with C, thanks) I choose three! (I also choose three!)
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
Would be hfs porters should also know that snow leopard (10.6) made further extensions to hfs+ and there can be data in a file created on 10.6 that even 10.5 can't see. On 3/22/10, Dale Rahn wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:39:07AM -0600, Ted Roby wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: >> >> > >> > I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and >> > still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus >> > partition. >> > >> >-Otto >> > >> >> >> This is more in line with what I am seeking. >> I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from >> hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist >> with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large >> SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy >> all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, >> copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as >> backups. >> >> My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus >> access on i386 for future Mac migrators. >> > > It should be possible to build the port on i386 with the 'ONLY_FOR' tag > changed, however I dont recall that the hfsplus code was new enough to > support case-sensitive filesystems. Testing would need to be done to verify > what filesystems (hfs/hfs+/journal/case-sensitive) features would work with > the hfsplus package if the macos partition was cleanly shut down (journal). > If someone were to do this testing and post a diff to ports@ with such > testing results, such diff would likely be accepted. > > Dale Rahn dr...@dalerahn.com > > -- Sent from my mobile device http://www.glumbert.com/media/shift http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk "This officer's men seem to follow him merely out of idle curiosity." -- Sandhurst officer cadet evaluation. "Securing an environment of Windows platforms from abuse - external or internal - is akin to trying to install sprinklers in a fireworks factory where smoking on the job is permitted." -- Gene Spafford learn french: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30v_g83VHK4
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Dale Rahn wrote: > > > It should be possible to build the port on i386 with the 'ONLY_FOR' tag > changed, however I dont recall that the hfsplus code was new enough to > support case-sensitive filesystems. Testing would need to be done to verify > what filesystems (hfs/hfs+/journal/case-sensitive) features would work with > the hfsplus package if the macos partition was cleanly shut down (journal). > If someone were to do this testing and post a diff to ports@ with such > testing results, such diff would likely be accepted. > > Dale Rahn dr...@dalerahn.com > I don't get past make. The ld complains about libhfsp.so.0.0 with undefined references to bswap_32, bswap_64 and bswap_16 /usr/local/bin/libtool --mode=link cc -O2 -pipe -L/usr/local/lib -o hpmount hpmount.o hpcache.o hfsputil.o glob.o dstring.o dlist.o ../libhfsp/src/libhfsp.la -lutf8 mkdir .libs cc -O2 -pipe -o .libs/hpmount hpmount.o hpcache.o hfsputil.o glob.o dstring.o dlist.o -L/usr/local/lib -L../libhfsp/src/.libs -lhfsp -lutf8 -Wl,-rpath,/usr/local/lib hpcache.o(.text+0x44): In function `hpcache_filename': : warning: strcpy() is almost always misused, please use strlcpy() hpcache.o(.text+0x51): In function `hpcache_filename': : warning: strcat() is almost always misused, please use strlcat() /usr/local/lib/libutf8.so.1.0: warning: sprintf() is often misused, please use snprintf() ../libhfsp/src/.libs/libhfsp.so.0.0: undefined reference to `bswap_32' ../libhfsp/src/.libs/libhfsp.so.0.0: undefined reference to `bswap_64' ../libhfsp/src/.libs/libhfsp.so.0.0: undefined reference to `bswap_16' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status gmake[2]: *** [hpmount] Error 1 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/pobj/hfsplus-1.0.4p2/hfsplus-1.0.4/src' gmake[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/pobj/hfsplus-1.0.4p2/hfsplus-1.0.4' gmake: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 *** Error code 2 Stop in /usr/ports/misc/hfsplus (line 2242 of /usr/ports/infrastructure/mk/ bsd.port.mk).
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:39:07AM -0600, Ted Roby wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > > > > > I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and > > still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus > > partition. > > > >-Otto > > > > > This is more in line with what I am seeking. > I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from > hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist > with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large > SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy > all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, > copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as > backups. > > My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus > access on i386 for future Mac migrators. > It should be possible to build the port on i386 with the 'ONLY_FOR' tag changed, however I dont recall that the hfsplus code was new enough to support case-sensitive filesystems. Testing would need to be done to verify what filesystems (hfs/hfs+/journal/case-sensitive) features would work with the hfsplus package if the macos partition was cleanly shut down (journal). If someone were to do this testing and post a diff to ports@ with such testing results, such diff would likely be accepted. Dale Rahn dr...@dalerahn.com
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Ted Unangst wrote: > > Getting data off a filesystem can be useful on any machine, even if > you don't intend to boot it. Ports are generally marked "only for" > because they only work there (read: are not written portably), not out > of a subjective "useful" call. > OK! I already suspected a need to "hack" through this problem. So, does the Darwin license harmonize with OpenBSD? (I suspect it does.) In this case, it might be more feasible for me to look at Darwin's way of handling the filesystem.
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Bryan Irvine wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote: >> I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus >> >> >> # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems. >> ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc >> >> >> It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh >> hardware now uses i386 architecture. Of course, changing this >> variable is not enough to cause a successful build. >> >> Has someone else setup a common way to get misc/hfsplus >> on i386, and I missed the answer on google? >> >> Is there a reason this would be a bad idea? >> >> If I "port" this port to i386 would it be warmly accepted? > > I'm sure someone else will correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the > only reason this is needed on ppc machines is because the openfirmware > expects an hfs volume to boot from so the bootloader is stored on a > small hfs partition. If that's the case this isn't needed on i386 > Macs. Getting data off a filesystem can be useful on any machine, even if you don't intend to boot it. Ports are generally marked "only for" because they only work there (read: are not written portably), not out of a subjective "useful" call.
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Otto Moerbeek wrote: > > I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and > still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus > partition. > >-Otto > This is more in line with what I am seeking. I have a large amount of data which must be moved over from hfsplus to ffs. Since I am running -current, and seeking to assist with development, -my- solution was to invest in another large SATA drive, and attach via USB. I will format it with FAT32, copy all desired media from large hfsplus backup volume, boot to openbsd, copy all that data to internal FFS, reformat new drive FFS and use as backups. My desire, however, is to possibly give OpenBSD portable hfsplus access on i386 for future Mac migrators.
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:07:24AM -0700, Bryan Irvine wrote: > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote: > > I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus > > > > > > # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems. > > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc > > > > > > It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh > > hardware now uses i386 architecture. Of course, changing this > > variable is not enough to cause a successful build. > > > > Has someone else setup a common way to get misc/hfsplus > > on i386, and I missed the answer on google? > > > > Is there a reason this would be a bad idea? > > > > If I "port" this port to i386 would it be warmly accepted? > > I'm sure someone else will correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the > only reason this is needed on ppc machines is because the openfirmware > expects an hfs volume to boot from so the bootloader is stored on a > small hfs partition. If that's the case this isn't needed on i386 > Macs. > > -Bryan Not completely right. OpenBSD/macppc can boot from a boot loader stored on a hfs (NOT hfsplus) partition and from a msdos partition on a mbr partioned disk. I suspect the OP would like to dual boot his intel mac machine and still have access from OpenBSD to the files stored on a hfsplus partition. -Otto
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Bryan Irvine wrote: > > I'm sure someone else will correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the > only reason this is needed on ppc machines is because the openfirmware > expects an hfs volume to boot from so the bootloader is stored on a > small hfs partition. If that's the case this isn't needed on i386 > Macs. > > -Bryan > Perhaps I misunderstood the purpose of the package. I am looking to mount hfs+ volumes (non-journaled, case-sensitive). This is beneficial to any hybrid or transitional Macintosh. In a hybrid system, I want the master OS (OpenBSD) to recognize all partitions.
Re: earmark on hfsplus port
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Ted Roby wrote: > I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus > > > # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems. > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc > > > It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh > hardware now uses i386 architecture. Of course, changing this > variable is not enough to cause a successful build. > > Has someone else setup a common way to get misc/hfsplus > on i386, and I missed the answer on google? > > Is there a reason this would be a bad idea? > > If I "port" this port to i386 would it be warmly accepted? I'm sure someone else will correct me if I'm wrong. I believe the only reason this is needed on ppc machines is because the openfirmware expects an hfs volume to boot from so the bootloader is stored on a small hfs partition. If that's the case this isn't needed on i386 Macs. -Bryan
earmark on hfsplus port
I've noticed this environment variable in misc/hfsplus # this only makes sense on macintosh (powerpc) systems. ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= powerpc It used to only make sense on powerpc systems, but Macintosh hardware now uses i386 architecture. Of course, changing this variable is not enough to cause a successful build. Has someone else setup a common way to get misc/hfsplus on i386, and I missed the answer on google? Is there a reason this would be a bad idea? If I "port" this port to i386 would it be warmly accepted?
