• Hucklebee
    link
    fedilink
    34
    edit-2
    22 days ago

    Can someone explain why MacOS always seems to create _MACOSX folders in zips that we Linux/Windows users always delete anyway?

    • @Surreal
      link
      1922 days ago

      Window adds desktop.ini randomly too

        • Cethin
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3722 days ago

          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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        Yeah, those tend to be pre-folder settings for the File Explorer.
        Like View options, thumbnails and such.

        It’s been a while for me, but I think there was something specially for thumbnails too. You might find one if you go into the folder options and set a folder to optimized for pictures/videos and add some to it.

        Anti Commercial-AI license

      • Hucklebee
        link
        fedilink
        222 days ago

        Huh, never noticed that. Probably always thought that was just part of the program/files needed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1622 days ago

      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?

    • LiveLM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      822 days ago

      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.

      • Hucklebee
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        22 days ago

        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!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          322 days ago

          You can definitely check, but I would expect the option to exist when the archive is created rather than when it’s extracted

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      422 days ago

      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)

    • @PoolloverNathan
      link
      322 days ago

      MacOS has two files per file, so the extras need to be stored somewhere.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      321 days ago

      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.

      • Hucklebee
        link
        fedilink
        221 days ago

        Yeah totally!

        frantically searches for the meaning of all those abbreviations

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          321 days ago

          I gotcha:

          • Btrfs
            • BTree File System
              • 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.
          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            221 days ago

            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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              120 days ago

              Well that’s good to know because I had some terrible luck with it about a decade ago. Although I don’t think I would go back to windows, I just don’t need it for work anymore and it’s become far too complex.

              I’ve also had pretty bad luck with BTRFS though, although it seems to have improved a lot in the past 3 years that I’ve been using it.

              ZFS would be good but having to rebuild the kernel module is a pain in the ass because when it fails to build you’re unbootable (on root). I also don’t like how clones are dependant on parents, requires a lot of forethought when you’re trying to create a reproducible build on eg Gentoo.