Talk:Unix File System

Universal File System vs. Unix File System

I'm studying up for my CompTIA A+ exam, and they had "UFS" defined as "Universal File System", not "Unix File System", likely due to the fact that it covers much more than just Unix? Or is that just errata in my study materials? —This unsigned comment was added by 67.38.227.182 (talk • contribs) 2006-04-03 21:19:18 UTC.

It's a question of context. Apparently there's a "Universal File System" in NetWare: [1].

There's also a site that claims that "UFS" in the UNIX sense stands for Universal File system - [2] - but they're wrong. Guy Harris 21:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soft Updates in UFS1

AFAIK softupdates have been part of freebsd since ver 3, thus long before UFS2! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.199.71.251 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 26 January 2004.

Rewrite, merge with FFS

I have largely rewritten this. Someone needs to run a spellchecker over me. --ssd 06:57, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Additions this article could now use:

Additions to UFS after FFS (I think they just increased field widths and added reserved fields)
More complete list of vendors who extended UFS
More complete list of proprietary features added to UFS for each vendor (as with above comment)

I'd add these, but I only have data for System V, Solaris, and Linux. SGI uses XFS instead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ssd (talk • contribs) 06:57, 12 July 2004.

Should this and FFS just be combined? As I remember, the first "UFS" was just the SunOS 2.0 version of the 4.2BSD FFS; 2.0 was the first SunOS version with a VFS layer into which file systems could be plugged (as it was the first one with more than one file system to plug into it, becaue 2.0 introduced NFS), and Sun called it UFS at that point. (It was definitely "UFS" in 4.0; I think that went back to 2.0.) Other commercial UN*X vendors probably picked up the Sun NFS code, which included a VFS layer, and probably also picked up the UFS name if they had FFS. The split of the code into FFS and UFS layers in BSD happened later. -- Guy Harris 01:17, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, merge. —Claunia 03:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree also, merge! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.31.88.115 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 25 January 2006.

One more for merge. The same merge just happened in the german wikipedia. -- Kvedulv 20:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me, too: merge. (Aside: Am I right in thinking that UFS is the "native" file system of FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD? If so, the article should probably mention them.) —Chris Chittleborough 09:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UFS still in OSX?

AFAIK support for UFS has been removed from OSX. Can someone confirm this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oneiros (talk • contribs) 01:52, 13 February 2006.

It is still as of 10.4.4.

Please sign messages.

—Claunia 04:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]