This page is a wiki. Please login or create an account to begin editing.


7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Arthegall's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011 Dec 31
A Project: Images, not loose files

As you all know, many of the downloads available on this site are in the form of loose files rather than any kind of disk image. And as you all know, this is not a desirable situation for many reasons. It's especially undesirable for the early files that don't work on MacOS 8 or later. Those files must be loaded from HFS volumes, and current MacOS can no longer create HFS volumes. For those files to be used, they must first be processed by older hardware.

This situation is a pain to fix because each download has to be checked by hand. If it's found to be a collection of loose files, those files then need to be imaged with a program that can create HFS volumes like Disk Copy 6.x or similar. That usually means the download check has to be made from an older machine, or the files have to be transferred to an older machine to fix. We're talking many, many hours.

I propose that we crowdsource a fix.

What we need are volunteers who have the ability to safely download loose vintage Mac files (i.e., they're using a Mac) and who have the ability to create HFS (not HFS+) images of those files.

We also need a method of dividing up the labor. I propose the following.

Most of the downloads on here are tagged with a year. If you click on a year, you are shown all the available downloads tagged with that year. Let's have volunteers claim a year and then go through and check all the downloads available for that year and fix the ones that need fixing. I'll do 1988.

1984:
1985
1986:
1987:
1988: Arthegall
1989:
1990:
1991:
1992:
1993:
1994:
1995:
1996:

Anything released after 1996 should work fine on an HFS+ volume and is not as immediate a concern. Once the early years are done, we can do the later ones.

Thoughts? Volunteers?

Comments

InkBlot's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009 Aug 6

What about MFS volumes? Some of the earliest programs will not work with HFS. I do not know if there are that many, but it is something that should be noted. In fact, there are some disk images already on this site that are in MFS format because the original media was in MFS format.

If I remember correctly, MFS was used on the 400K floppy disks, and Apple moved to HFS in 1985. Also, System versions prior to Mac OS 8.0 were able to read/write to MFS. In any case, software released prior to September 1985 might be best stored on MFS disk images.

I do not know if most emulators support MFS disk images, but I am positive that Mini vMac can mount these images without issue.

Arthegall's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011 Dec 31

Any images of original media from 84/85 will by default be MFS, as will most any single-sided disk from later. But the Mac Plus (which introduced HFS in 86) was quite backward compatible, and software that originally came on an MFS volume can 1) be opened and read by any machine likely to be able to run it at all and 2) safely moved to and run from an HFS volume unless there's copy protection issues. Remember, MFS and HFS are just file systems. They have nothing to do with the actual software data.

The only way an HFS volume would be a problem is if you tried to mount it on a vintage 128k or 512k Mac or on a version of Mini vMac using a 64k ROM and built to emulate one of those original Macs. The problem then is that the machine doesn't know how to mount and read the newer file format.

That's the problem with HFS+ volumes. HFS+ wasn't released until '98 with MacOS 8.1. So any actual or emulated machine running any system before 8.1 isn't going to be able to mount an HFS+ volume. The data on the volume is perfectly fine. The older system software simply doesn't know how to read it.

Let me be clear that I'm not recommending any conversion of volumes.
DON'T start converting MFS downloads to HFS or anything else.
All I'm saying is that we need to take loose files that are not currently packaged in disk images (see Pirates! for example from 1988 and on my list to do) and package them into images.

Offline
Joined: 2009 Aug 27

The emulators shouldn't care about the filesystem of the disk. Its the format of the disk image and the OS that really matters. I would say use OS 6 to transfer the files to a disk image. It may not be able to run the programs, but it should handle the different file systems. If memory serves me correctly new OS's will try and update the file system automatically.

Offline
Joined: 2009 Aug 27

I forgot to add, that as a person the runs most of this stuff from an emulator, packaging things as images rather than stuffed folders really helps me out. It makes transferring programs into the emulator so much easier.

IIGS_User's picture
Online
Joined: 2009 Apr 8

I forgot to add, that as a person the runs most of this stuff from an emulator, packaging things as images rather than stuffed folders really helps me out. It makes transferring programs into the emulator so much easier.

Very, very true.
Recently, I found Block Out entry, where I plan to upload a Disk Image soon. For the peoples watching for original media, this disk image has been created off of original media some years ago.

Also, I started to scan the complete manual now, rather than the pages describing cp only, like before.
The current 'manual' upload is my work, too.

IIGS_User's picture
Online
Joined: 2009 Apr 8

The emulators shouldn't care about the filesystem of the disk.

Mostly, if you create a disk image on Mac OS X (the host), the Mac OS in the emulator asks to initialize it the very first time it will be mounted within.