[Info-vax] Request description of UFS for VMS person

[ChrisQ]

David J Dachtera wrote:
> AEF wrote:
>>  Hi,
>>
>> Can anyone here point me to a reference that describes the Unix file
>> system (UFS) at a level and detail similar to the that found in the
>> reference below? I've Googled for it and looked at a few books and had
>> no luck. Thanks!
>>
>> Guide to OpenVMS File Applications, Section 1.2.2:
>>
>> http://h71000.www7.hp.com/doc/731final/4506/4506pro_001.html#apps_files_11controlfiles
> 
> Well, and perhaps one of the more UN*X-literate folks can double-check
> me here, probably the most striking short fall of - AFAIK - *ALL* of the
> UN*X filesystems is their extreme fragility. Without a backup, the loss
> of a directory is typically unrecoverable. Why? Because the name of a
> file is stored ONLY in the directory! ...there is no duplication in a
> file header as we know it in VMS. Unless you have a list of filenames
> with their I-nodes in some human-readable form, lose a directory and
> you're toast!
> 
> D.J.D.

Not familiar with all the details, but ufs is very old, perhaps the 
original unix file system from bsd circa 70's/80's timeframe. It's still 
available if you choose to use it, but have you looked at all the later 
linux filesystems and zfs on Solaris ?. Very different and far more robust.

Last time I installed Tru64, I chose ufs because of all the restrictions 
and extra cost involved with using advfs, which required added licences 
just for the utilities, can you believe it ?. How greedy and out of 
touch with reality could dec get ?. Very good unix, but almost zero 
added value. It's all in the box with with more modern unices, (eg) 
Solaris, which does full volume management, raid (software or hardware) 
and loads of other good stuff that makes it a snap to setup and 
maintain. The world has moved on...

Regards,

Chris