From: Matt McLeod Date: 15:48 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: OS X and network filesystems This has been getting on my nerves for a while now. So. We have an SMB network browser built in to the automounter. Great. Nice enough idea. But it doesn't work reliably. Sometimes machines will show up in /Network, sometimes they won't, and sometimes they'll show up but the automounter won't mount any of the shares even when it knows the password and could quite easily do so. And when that happens, you have to mount them manually, in which case they appear as /Volumes/share rather than /Network/host/share. Which is a real PITA if you're trying to script anything. It's bloody irritating, and in four major revisions of the OS they *still* haven't managed to get this right. Matt
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 17:25 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems > It's bloody irritating, and in four major revisions of the OS > they *still* haven't managed to get this right. That's -ing Finder's fault. I ported AMD to OS X a while back and cranked it up, and set it up to do the mounting magic... and as soon as Finder noticed there were network filesystems it didn't expect it tossed a bunch of completely WRONG network icons on the desktop (including, at one point, one called '/') and went catatonic. When I restarted Finder it went out and found those non-network shares again and pulled the blanket over its head. It did the same when I logged out and whan I rebooted. I had to boot single-user and stop AMD from starting up to Finder has this model of How Network Shares Work that is programmed into its sorry Carbon-based DNA and this model completely fails to make contact with any rational design at any point, and you can't do anything about it.
From: Matt McLeod Date: 17:42 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems Peter da Silva wrote: > > It's bloody irritating, and in four major revisions of the OS > > they *still* haven't managed to get this right. > > That's -ing Finder's fault. Stuff in /Network is under the control of /usr/sbin/automount. And it would appear that they haven't updated the manpage to cover the CIFS-related stuff -- or, for that matter, the "-f" switch which is being passed to it on startup. I'm sure Finder is doing some stupid things too, but this one would appear to not be it. At least not in 10.3. Matt
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 19:49 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems > > > It's bloody irritating, and in four major revisions of the OS > > > they *still* haven't managed to get this right. > > That's -ing Finder's fault. > Stuff in /Network is under the control of /usr/sbin/automount. That doesn't mean the suck isn't Finder's fault. If Apple hadn't grabbed Finder by the balls and said "don't try and pull your stupid damn tricks on this part of the file system" Finder would be trying to take control of it as well, and if Finder didn't need to be shown the bricks periodically you could use a bog standard automounter instead of apple's mutant reeking evil variant.
From: David Champion Date: 18:25 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems * On 2004.01.16, in <20040116172550.8C0D541476@xxxxxxx.xx.xxxxxxx.xxx>, * "Peter da Silva" <peter@xxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > Finder has this model of How Network Shares Work that is programmed > into its sorry Carbon-based DNA and this model completely fails to > make contact with any rational design at any point, and you can't > do anything about it. You can not run Finder.
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 20:02 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems > You can not run Finder. Is that sarcasm or is there actually some useful information buried in that surprising comment?
From: Darrell Fuhriman Date: 20:09 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems > Is that sarcasm or is there actually some useful information buried in that > surprising comment? it is possible to replace finder with the application of your choosing. I don't remember *how* off the top of my head. One option would be Pathfinder. http://www.cocoatech.com/ Well, duh, I bet they know how, and yes, they do know. http://www.cocoatech.com/faqs.php#replace Darrell
From: David Champion Date: 20:18 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: Re: OS X and network filesystems * On 2004.01.16, in <20040116200923.GA27818@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx>, * "Darrell Fuhriman" <darrell@xxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx> wrote: > > Is that sarcasm or is there actually some useful information buried in that > > surprising comment? > > it is possible to replace finder with the application of your > choosing. I don't remember *how* off the top of my head. One > option would be Pathfinder. http://www.cocoatech.com/ > > Well, duh, I bet they know how, and yes, they do know. > > http://www.cocoatech.com/faqs.php#replace Yes, that's the ticket. Maybe I should try Path Finder; I didn't know about that replacement option. (I got the tip off macosxlabs.org or something, where they weren't particular about what you might want to replace Finder with.) Originally, I replaced Finder with RBrowser, since, you know. It's a NeXT Browser clone. I even registered it. And even on 10.2 & 10.3 it still has a fully-functional, honest-to-bog shelf, god bless it. But after RBrowser decided I wasn't allowed to delete files anymore, I just installed XShelf, made Finder quittable (see above URL) and set my loginwindow finder app to Terminal.app. I starts Finder when I needs it, and I quits it when I doesn't. I tell you, this maneuver changed my Macintoshing life. Such joy it is not to have bleeding Finder pop to the forground just cause I accidentally clicked on the background. And so satisfying to say: "No, you know what, Finder? Screw you. <Cmd-Q>"
From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 20:18 on 16 Jan 2004 Subject: > it is possible to replace finder with the application of your > choosing. Ah, but that's the tricky bit. Finding an application to choose. No, Pathfinder isn't it. Duplicating Microsoft's insecurity innovations is not my idea of a good time.
Generated at 10:26 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi