They are talking about USB/Firewire drives where the Mac would be in control of it and responsible for talking to the filesystem... i quote..On the Time Machine web page it says that it only works with HFS.
Not that you're responding to me, but ... I think the previous poster meant to say that, as previously reported, Leopard uses *multiple* hard linking, which as I understand it, is part of POSIX but is not widely implemented.Wow, you really don't know what that means.
Apple has never indicated this publicly, and what they did indicate publicly seems to contradict it.If it is NAS and if you can write to it from your Mac, it would probably work.
Wow. I hope that's joke (the going to Windows part. I understand the overall sentiment regarding NAS issues, as I have the same problem)....This is a bunch of CRAP! I've always had problems writing to a NAS from Mac OS X. The only NAS that would work 100% would be another Mac, cha-CHING! Apple SUCKS! Hello Windows XP! - the platform supported by everything.
I suspect Macvault prefers to continue using OS X as it gives him the opportunity to complain about it, whereas were he to stick solely with Windows, he would have to find something else to complain about, as well as to someone else.If not, See you in 6 months when you can't get Windows Time Machine working with your NAS... Oh wait...
No, that's not right either. Have you ever investigated this on your system? There are plenty of hard links used by UNIX.Not that you're responding to me, but ... I think the previous poster meant to say that, as previously reported, Leopard uses *multiple* hard linking, which as I understand it, is part of POSIX but is not widely implemented.
There are plenty of hard links, but my understanding, as that article stated, is that multiple hard links to the same file are not currently used in OS X. Or rather, if you're going to keep contradicting everyone, at least pontificate on what you believe is right instead of just saying everyone else is wrong!No, that's not right either. Have you ever investigated this on your system? There are plenty of hard links used by UNIX.
Don't listen to them. I don't think they know what they're talking about.
/usr/bin/gzcat /usr/bin/gzip /usr/bin/gunzip /usr/bin/zcat
/usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetPathType.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetTranslatedPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetTranslatedStringPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSJoinPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSCopyDirectory.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSJoinToPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSData.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSConvertToPathType.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSLink.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetInternalRep.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSEqualPaths.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSListVolumes.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSRegister.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetCwd.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSNewNativePath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_AllocStatBuf.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSOpenFileChannel.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSRemoveDirectory.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSStat.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSLoadFile.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSRenameFile.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetNativePath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSAccess.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSFileAttrsGet.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSDeleteFile.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSEvalFile.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSUtime.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetFileSystemForPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSChdir.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSUnregister.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSSplitPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSFileAttrStrings.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSLstat.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSPathSeparator.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSFileSystemInfo.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSCreateDirectory.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSMatchInDirectory.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSCopyFile.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSMountsChanged.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSGetNormalizedPath.3tcl /usr/share/man/man3/Tcl_FSFileAttrsSet.3tcl
But that is what a hard link is.multiple hard links to the same file are not currently used in OS X
Hard links. A file can have more than one name. This allows two different file names, which can be in different folders, to point to the same data.
What is strange is the fact that we have a filesystem (HFS +) that was engineered with the idea that there is one file that has only one name. That's what allows you to save a file to a different location or move it, and the application picks up the change seamlessly.In contrast, a symbolic link is a special Unix file type (), and contains a file path that points elsewhere.