<div dir="auto"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Jun 27, 2024, 6:07 AM Dan Cross <<a href="mailto:crossd@gmail.com">crossd@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 8:02 AM Peter Yardley<br>
<<a href="mailto:peter.martin.yardley@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">peter.martin.yardley@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> OSX is Mach which has a BSD emulation layer. And BSD injected into the kernel.<br>
><br>
> It doesn’t claim to be UNIX.<br>
<br>
Not true! It does: macOS is actually certified and registered as Unix.<br>
It's my understanding that Apple paid a fair bit of money to make that<br>
happen: <a href="https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/</a></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Indeed (can't authoritatively speak to the cost). FreeBSD has started getting a trickle of fixes to cope with the test suite compliance. Some are very test suite specific like checking to make sure argv[0] != NULL in some weird programs... some fix real problems though..</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Warner</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
- Dan C.<br>
<br>
<br>
> > On 27 Jun 2024, at 1:29 PM, ron minnich <<a href="mailto:rminnich@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rminnich@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > I have a directory, t:<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ ls -li<br>
> > total 0<br>
> > 23801442 -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 a<br>
> > 23801443 -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 b<br>
> > 23801443 -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 c<br>
> ><br>
> > note that b and c are the same inode.<br>
> ><br>
> > let's make a cpio.<br>
> ><br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ cpio -o >../t.cpio<br>
> > a<br>
> > b<br>
> > c<br>
> > ^D<br>
> > 1 block<br>
> ><br>
> > what's in it?<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ cpio -ivt < ../t.cpio<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 a<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 b<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 c link to b<br>
> ><br>
> > "c link to b"? wtf? Who thought that was a good idea? because ...<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ touch 'c link to b'<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ ls -l<br>
> > total 0<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 a<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 b<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 c<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:22 c link to b<br>
> ><br>
> > and<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ cpio -o >../t.cpio<br>
> > a<br>
> > b<br>
> > c<br>
> > c link to b<br>
> > ^D<br>
> ><br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ cpio -ivt < ../t.cpio<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 a<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 b<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 c link to b<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:22 c link to b<br>
> ><br>
> > so ... it looks like a file is there twice, because somebody thought it was a good idea to confuse a file name and file metadata. And, anyway, it's just as accurate to have it say<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 a<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 b link to c<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 2 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:21 c link to b<br>
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rminnich wheel 0 Jun 26 20:22 c link to b<br>
> > Right? :-)<br>
> ><br>
> > From the same people who brought you this:<br>
> > ronsexcllentmbp:t rminnich$ bc<br>
> > >>><br>
> ><br>
> > Somebody needs to get the osx folks a unix manual set :-)<br>
><br>
> Peter Yardley<br>
> <a href="mailto:peter.martin.yardley@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">peter.martin.yardley@gmail.com</a><br>
><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>