From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3e1162e60510102252y6e10ca4ejb50e6db1897cb697@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 22:52:56 -0700 From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] [Fwd: road sign] In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <4349E6B7.20008@lanl.gov> <20051011015640.5EEA91AB1BD@dexter-peak.quanstro.net> <20051011024950.GB28444@localhost.localdomain> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9980c506-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > > > > No, but the RFCs never really covered correct handling of 'forked' > > binary files (such as those found on Macs). > > Thankfully, even Apple on OS X has slowly gone away from the blasted > Resource Forks. Sure, you can still use them (if you're Adobe), but > none of the Cocoa or CoreFoundation APIs go out and encourage to > resource forks any more. No but the whole OS pretty much relies on storing things in extended attributes now. Even the resource forks can be found there now. [I believe this is also where ACLs are stored but don't quote me on this] Why does a file need to be like a directory? Isn't that what directories are for? :) Dave