manuel companys wrote: > Thank you for your explanation, Jeanne. > > Mach-O looks more ... "� la Unix" to me. Am I right?
My understanding is it's more of a compromise between the NeXT folks and the Mac loyalists at Apple. These two camps slugged it out heavily during the evolution of NeXT into OS X, and some issues still have the long-term plan remaining to be defined (such as the fate of creator codes). By having folders that pretend to be applications, Apple can have bundled resources and metadata without relying on the resource fork. As a Mac-specific feature, the dual-fork paradigm introduces new challenges when porting from UNIX or NeXT. While Classic is still supported the file system that understands resource forks remains in place. But with Mach-O bundles as the long-term solution, resource forks will eventually be phased out. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation Developer of WebMerge 2.1: Publish any database on any site ___________________________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com Tel: 323-225-3717 AIM: FourthWorldInc _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
