Subject: Re: Hidden Files Not Being Copied
From: Bill Moran (wmoran@mail.iowna.com)
Date: Thu Jan 18 2001 - 10:30:47 EST
Basil Hussain wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> > Really, when you think about it, shouldn't Netatalk translate dotfiles
> > to "invisible" files on the Mac? Mangle the filename with an underscore
> > or something. Just a thought/suggestion.
>
> The above suggestion wouldn't really hold water with any kind of
> out-of-the-norm usage, because what if you actually have non-hidden files
> who's names start with underscores? The same applies to almost any character
> you might think of as well.
I can't see how that would cause a problem. The underscore (or whatever
character) is not there to indicate that the file is "invisible", there
would be some sort of flag for that at the filesystem level, like the
hidden/system/readonly attributes on the old DOS fs. The Mac must have
some sort of attributes to indicate that the file is "invisible" (OK, I
admit, I don't KNOW, but how else would it be done) The mangle character
(underscore in this example) would simply make the filename valid for
the Mac. The Mac wouldn't reverse the translation (If you created a file
from the Mac that started with an underscore it wouldn't necessarily be
invisible) However, on the UNIX box, the file would be created starting
with a dot so that it retained its invisible status if it were created
invisible from the Mac. Somewhat the same way long filenames are mangled
to fit old 8.3 notation. It's a translation scheme really, actually you
could do away with the _ altogether, just send the name minus the dot.
You could get filename contention problems, but this to could be dealt
with somehow.
> Could it not be implemented so, that when a folder duplication or copy
> action is perfomed, Netatalk recognises this somehow and checks the contents
> of the folder for hidden 'dot' files/directories (other than .AppleDouble,
> obviously) and sends a message to the client Mac saying if there are?
> Something along the lines of: "The folder you just copied contained <x>
> hidden files and <y> hidden directories. If you wanted to copy these too,
> you must do it manually.".
>
> Although (as pondered in my previous message), if the file copy actions are
> initiated client-side, then this couldn't happen, could it? Or could it?
I'm not terribly familiar with Macs, how do you set a file to be
invisible?
The popup option would be a nice feature, but it seems to me that this
could be implemented in a better manner ... something to ponder on. My
problem is that I'm simply not that familiar with Macs.
-Bill
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Oct 14 2001 - 03:04:31 EDT