this is a complete uneducated guess from a relatively tech-illiterate guy, but could it contain mac-specific information about weird non-essential stuff like folder backgrounds and item placement on the no-grid view?
That’s not Linux doing that. It’s the demons in your hardware trying to escape. They normally don’t cause too many issues luckily, but if you don’t close the portals occasionally they can take over your system.
They’re Metadata specific for Macs.
If you download a third party compression tool they’ll probably have an option somewhere to exclude these from the zips but the default tool doesn’t Afaik.
HFS+ has a different features set than NTFS or ext4, Apple elect to store metadata that way.
I would imagine modern FS like ZFS or btrfs could benefit from doing something similar but nobody has chosen to implement something like that in that way.
A Copy on White file system that supports snapshots, supported mostly by
ZFS
Zetabyte File System
Copy on Write File System. Less flexible than BTRFS but generally more robust and stable. Better compression in my experience than BTRFS. Out of Kernel Linux support and native FreeBSD.
HFS+
what Mac uses, I have no clue about this. some Copy on Write stuff.
NTFS
Windows File System
From what I know, no compression or COW
In my experience less stable than ext4/ZFS but maybe it’s better nowadays.
Great summary, but I’ve to add that NTFS is WAY more stable than ext4 when it comes to hardware glitches and/or power failures. ZFS is obviously superior to both but overkill for most people, BTRFS should be a nice middle ground and now even NAS manufacturers like Synology are migrating ext4 into BTRFS.
Can someone explain why MacOS always seems to create _MACOSX folders in zips that we Linux/Windows users always delete anyway?
MacOS has two files per file, so the extras need to be stored somewhere.
“Resource forks” IIRC, old stuff. Same for the .DS_Store file.
For just $12.99 you can disable this https://apps.apple.com/us/app/blueharvest/id739483376
this is a complete uneducated guess from a relatively tech-illiterate guy, but could it contain mac-specific information about weird non-essential stuff like folder backgrounds and item placement on the no-grid view?
Correct. It contains filesystem metadata that’s not supported in the zip files “filesystem”.
Window adds desktop.ini randomly too
Huh, never noticed that. Probably always thought that was just part of the program/files needed.
Linux adds .demon_portal files all over my computer too.
That’s not Linux doing that. It’s the demons in your hardware trying to escape. They normally don’t cause too many issues luckily, but if you don’t close the portals occasionally they can take over your system.
Yeah, those tend to be pre-folder settings for the File Explorer.
Like View options, thumbnails and such
You’re thinking of the
thumbs.dbfiles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_thumbnail_cache#Thumbs.dbThey’re Metadata specific for Macs.
If you download a third party compression tool they’ll probably have an option somewhere to exclude these from the zips but the default tool doesn’t Afaik.
Thanks! Hmm, never thought of looking at 7zip’s settings to see if it can autodelete/not unpack that stuff. I’ll see if I can find such a setting!
You can definitely check, but I would expect the option to exist when the archive is created rather than when it’s extracted
Because Apple always gotta fuck with and “innovate” perfectly working shit
Windows’s built-in tool can make zips without fucking with shit AND the resulting zip works just fine across systems.
Mac though…Mac produced zips always ALWAYS give me issues when trying to unzip on a non-mac (ESPECIALLY Linux)
HFS+ has a different features set than NTFS or ext4, Apple elect to store metadata that way.
I would imagine modern FS like ZFS or btrfs could benefit from doing something similar but nobody has chosen to implement something like that in that way.
Yeah totally!
frantically searches for the meaning of all those abbreviations
I gotcha:
Great summary, but I’ve to add that NTFS is WAY more stable than ext4 when it comes to hardware glitches and/or power failures. ZFS is obviously superior to both but overkill for most people, BTRFS should be a nice middle ground and now even NAS manufacturers like Synology are migrating ext4 into BTRFS.