Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Just thought I would pass this on, as it is not in any of the man pages! This drove me nuts for the better part of a day until I found a reference to this on some obscure web site discussing the kernel source code for FC6. I'm posting it here in the hopes that it will be useful for someone.
I was trying to retrieve some data on a hard drive from a
Powerbook G4 (the so-called "TiBook") that was running Mac OS X 10.3. That version of the OS uses Apple's HFS+ file system. I wanted to mount that hard drive on one of my Linux systems running FC6 so I can take the data off.
The man pages only mention HFS as a valid filesystem, so I tried mounting the volume with:
mount -t hfs <blah blah>
It would mount the hard drive alright, but it would only show me a few things on there, along with a readme file that says that I needed to upgrade to a version of MacOS greater than 8.6 or something like that. (I don't have the drive hooked up as I write this, so I can't go back and check). I tried all kinds of variations of the above mount command, to no avail.
Then, I found a reference to an 'hfsplus' file system on a web site discussing the source code for the FC6 kernel. So I tried:
mount -t hfsplus <blah blah>
It worked! I was able to pull off everything I needed. I didn't try any of the HFS options with this, however. I would presume the hfs options would be valid on hfsplus, but this is only a guess. Plus, I didn't try writing anything to the volume (my main concern was data retrieval). But since this seems to be an undocumented feature, I would be leary of writing anything to an hfsplus volume unless A) the data on a given HFS+ volume is not of any value and can be lost without any great pain or B) you are desperate. Perhaps someone who uses HFS+ on linux on a regular basis can shead some light on this subject?
It was really helpful and actually it did help someone. thanks agian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcase5
Just thought I would pass this on, as it is not in any of the man pages! This drove me nuts for the better part of a day until I found a reference to this on some obscure web site discussing the kernel source code for FC6. I'm posting it here in the hopes that it will be useful for someone.
I was trying to retrieve some data on a hard drive from a
Powerbook G4 (the so-called "TiBook") that was running Mac OS X 10.3. That version of the OS uses Apple's HFS+ file system. I wanted to mount that hard drive on one of my Linux systems running FC6 so I can take the data off.
The man pages only mention HFS as a valid filesystem, so I tried mounting the volume with:
mount -t hfs <blah blah>
It would mount the hard drive alright, but it would only show me a few things on there, along with a readme file that says that I needed to upgrade to a version of MacOS greater than 8.6 or something like that. (I don't have the drive hooked up as I write this, so I can't go back and check). I tried all kinds of variations of the above mount command, to no avail.
Then, I found a reference to an 'hfsplus' file system on a web site discussing the source code for the FC6 kernel. So I tried:
mount -t hfsplus <blah blah>
It worked! I was able to pull off everything I needed. I didn't try any of the HFS options with this, however. I would presume the hfs options would be valid on hfsplus, but this is only a guess. Plus, I didn't try writing anything to the volume (my main concern was data retrieval). But since this seems to be an undocumented feature, I would be leary of writing anything to an hfsplus volume unless A) the data on a given HFS+ volume is not of any value and can be lost without any great pain or B) you are desperate. Perhaps someone who uses HFS+ on linux on a regular basis can shead some light on this subject?
I've had a little time to play with this, and found the following:
1. The 'hfsplus' file system type is read-only under FC6. I have an external firewire (IEEE 1394) drive (use it to back up my servers) that I usually use on my iMac G3 (which is on the blink). I tried hooking up to a firewire-equipped Linux box so I can keep doing my backups onto this drive, and it will only mount the filesystem as read only. Drat! I guess that explains why the 'hfsplus' filesystem is undocumented; it's probably an incomplete feature. Reminds me of NTFS functionality circa RH6 or 7, if memory serves.
2. Interestingly enough, when I plug in my external hfs+ disk into my Linux system, it does automatically and properly recognize the file system and mount it. But, as I said before, I can only read it; I cannot write to it.
I was wondering if anybody out there could help me out. I am trying to mount an HFS+ external hard drive via USB to my PC running FC5.
I used gparted to figure out what and where info was on the drive. It seems that I have:
/dev/sda1 - /dev/sda8 <--- < 256 kb on these "unrecognized" partitions
/dev/sda9 <--- 8.5 MB, the "boot" drive
/dev/sda10 <--- 298GB, an unrecognized partition
I used
> mount -t hfsplus /dev/sda9 /mac_gerald/
to mount the boot sector, which worked just fine. Now I'm not quite sure how to get to the juicy goodness of my sda10 partition, where all of my precious music has been living.
For your helpful kindness I will reward you with a story of my stupidity, which is why this post is being made. The lab that I worked in as a grad student used only macs. When before I graduated and moved away I wanted to back up all of my data/music that I collected over the years. I plugged the hd in assuming that it was already FAT/NTFS formatted and thought nothing of the formatting until I moved back home (200 miles away) and plugged the external into a PC ... and couldn't reach any of the data.
I would love to see the music again so I don't have to re-rip all of my CD's, but really, really need my data.
Thanks for help/thoughts and if nothing else I hope that you all like the story : )
Just thought I would pass this on, as it is not in any of the man pages! This drove me nuts for the better part of a day until I found a reference to this on some obscure web site discussing the kernel source code for FC6. I'm posting it here in the hopes that it will be useful for someone.
I was trying to retrieve some data on a hard drive from a
Powerbook G4 (the so-called "TiBook") that was running Mac OS X 10.3. That version of the OS uses Apple's HFS+ file system. I wanted to mount that hard drive on one of my Linux systems running FC6 so I can take the data off.
The man pages only mention HFS as a valid filesystem, so I tried mounting the volume with:
mount -t hfs <blah blah>
It would mount the hard drive alright, but it would only show me a few things on there, along with a readme file that says that I needed to upgrade to a version of MacOS greater than 8.6 or something like that. (I don't have the drive hooked up as I write this, so I can't go back and check). I tried all kinds of variations of the above mount command, to no avail.
Then, I found a reference to an 'hfsplus' file system on a web site discussing the source code for the FC6 kernel. So I tried:
mount -t hfsplus <blah blah>
It worked! I was able to pull off everything I needed. I didn't try any of the HFS options with this, however. I would presume the hfs options would be valid on hfsplus, but this is only a guess. Plus, I didn't try writing anything to the volume (my main concern was data retrieval). But since this seems to be an undocumented feature, I would be leary of writing anything to an hfsplus volume unless A) the data on a given HFS+ volume is not of any value and can be lost without any great pain or B) you are desperate. Perhaps someone who uses HFS+ on linux on a regular basis can shead some light on this subject?
Anyway, hope someone finds this of use.
Robert...
Is it possible with Ubuntu as well? can you please give me the steps how to do this? i want to make linux case insensitive filename
i do not want the following file names to be created in the same folder:
ab.c
Ab.c
aB.c
AB.c
thanks
i actually did get mine to mount, but it was a real bugger.
i totally forgot about this post.
i don't know why it worked and really don't care (because it did in fact work), but what i did to mount my external hd (using usb connection) with fedora core 4 was:
> mount -t ufs -o ufstype=44bsd,ro /dev/sda10 /mac_gerald
hopefully this will help somebody else. it took me a long, long, long time to find this command ... and for some reason it works.
Distribution: Fedora, Gentoo, Debian, Slackware, IRIX, OS X
Posts: 192
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcase5
I've had a little time to play with this, and found the following:
1. The 'hfsplus' file system type is read-only under FC6. I have an external firewire (IEEE 1394) drive (use it to back up my servers) that I usually use on my iMac G3 (which is on the blink). I tried hooking up to a firewire-equipped Linux box so I can keep doing my backups onto this drive, and it will only mount the filesystem as read only. Drat! I guess that explains why the 'hfsplus' filesystem is undocumented; it's probably an incomplete feature. Reminds me of NTFS functionality circa RH6 or 7, if memory serves.
2. Interestingly enough, when I plug in my external hfs+ disk into my Linux system, it does automatically and properly recognize the file system and mount it. But, as I said before, I can only read it; I cannot write to it.
Robert...
I sorta remember recompiling the kernel to include full hfs+ support and mac partition table support and using my ipod (which was hfs+) under Linux. I remember having write support without any issues...but...that was a while ago.
Distribution: Vector Linux 5.1 Std., Vector Linux 5.8 Std., Win2k, XP, OS X (10.4 & 10.5)
Posts: 344
Rep:
Armanox,
Can you recall which distribution you re-compiled HFS+ Support in? I am currently working with computers of all flavors and I would like to extend interoperability between them as much as possible. Did the re-compile allow full read, write and delete permissions on the HFS+ partition?
Distribution: Fedora, Gentoo, Debian, Slackware, IRIX, OS X
Posts: 192
Rep:
I've had RWX support on HFS+ in Fedora 6-8, Slackware 10.2-12, Debian 4.0, and Ubuntu 6.06. I do remember that it refused to write to HFS+ when Journaling was enabled. So, I had to use a mac to disable journaling in the iPod.
i'm running into this exact problem now with hfsplus hdd's and fedora 8. my gf took my macbook out of town for the week so i can't disable journaling until next week but does anyone know if there is a workaround for the fact that timemachine on my mac requires journaling and hsfplus support in fedora requires it be turned off?
does the below trick counteract this contradiction as well?
i want to use my fedora box to serve some externals for my macbook one of which being my time machine backup. currently my mac shows the samba share correctly, i can poke around a bit but time machine says "unable to mount volume" i assume because it's mounted as read-only in fedora.
Distribution: Fedora, Gentoo, Debian, Slackware, IRIX, OS X
Posts: 192
Rep:
The issue isn't legality, it's the same problem with NTFS - we know what we want, we just have to figure out how to get it on our own. As I said before, there is support for HFS+ in the kernel, just not write support of journaled HFS+
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.