Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

A couple of SS observations

Expand Messages
  • ted_m_p_lee
    Again, kudos to John for keeping this going. I m still thinking about the most sensible way to use SS in a Leopard installation. Two comments. I ve learned
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 7, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Again, kudos to John for keeping this going. I'm still thinking about the most sensible way to
      use SS in a Leopard installation. Two comments. I've learned that it does seem to work well
      to put either or both applications and data in the Unix folder, rather than on the SS volume.
      The only problem is, as best I can tell, if the applications are in the Unix folder the desktop
      database doesn't find them -- so you lose the automatic association between application and
      data. (It's been so long since I've had a classic system with multiple volumes I don't
      remember whether it was able to handle them or not.) It's OK to have the data in the Unix
      folder -- the right app is automatically found. It just doesn't seem to work to have apps there
      if you want to make use of the creator association. (They execute fine.) Second, I have at
      least one classic application (Mangia) that doesn't work with the AdobePS driver (either with
      or without the virtual printer plugin) -- but it works fine with the Laserwriter 8 driver. So that
      might be a hint for those trying to do more than just WP under SheepShaver. (WP works fine.)

      Ted Lee
      Minnetonka, MN
    • John Rethorst
      ... Have you tried rebuilding the SS desktop after you ve put these applications in the Unix folder? The best way to do that is use the Desktop Reset utility
      Message 2 of 4 , Feb 9, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "ted_m_p_lee" <tmplee@...> wrote:

        > I've learned that it does seem to work well to put either or both
        > applications and data in the Unix folder, rather than on the SS volume.
        > The only problem is, as best I can tell, if the applications are in the Unix
        > folder the desktop database doesn't find them -- so you lose the
        > automatic association between application and data. (It's been so
        > long since I've had a classic system with multiple volumes I don't
        > remember whether it was able to handle them or not.) It's OK to
        > have the data in the Unix folder -- the right app is automatically
        > found. It just doesn't seem to work to have apps there if you want
        > to make use of the creator association. (They execute fine.)

        Have you tried rebuilding the SS desktop after you've put these
        applications in the Unix folder? The best way to do that is use the
        "Desktop Reset" utility in the Utilities folder, restarting afterwards.
        I don't know if that will fix this particular issue. Rebuilding the
        desktop is a good idea every month or so. Being a classic OS and
        all, it also doesn't hurt to restart (i.e. SS, not your machine) every
        few days. Just choose Restart from the Finder's Special menu.

        John R.
      • ted_m_p_lee
        ... Yes, I ve tried that without any success. But I did discover that if an application in the Unix folder was running, if I tried to open a document
        Message 3 of 4 , Feb 10, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "John Rethorst" <jrethorst@...> wrote:

          >
          > Have you tried rebuilding the SS desktop after you've put these
          > applications in the Unix folder? The best way to do that is use the
          > "Desktop Reset" utility in the Utilities folder, restarting afterwards.
          > I don't know if that will fix this particular issue. Rebuilding the
          > desktop is a good idea every month or so. Being a classic OS and
          > all, it also doesn't hurt to restart (i.e. SS, not your machine) every
          > few days. Just choose Restart from the Finder's Special menu.
          >

          Yes, I've tried that without any success. But I did discover that if an application in the Unix
          folder was running, if I tried to open a document belonging to that application (e.g., WP or
          Framemaker were two I tried) the application did open the document properly.

          Ted Lee
          Minnetonka, MN
        • hnd101
          ... From: ted_m_p_lee ... if an ... I ve been wondering about this issue... I suspect SheepShaver mounts the Unix folder as a
          Message 4 of 4 , Feb 19, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "ted_m_p_lee" <tmplee@...>
            > Yes, I've tried that without any success. But I did discover that
            if an
            > application in the Unix
            > folder was running, if I tried to open a document belonging to that
            > application (e.g., WP or
            > Framemaker were two I tried) the application did open the document
            > properly.



            I've been wondering about this issue... I suspect SheepShaver mounts
            the Unix folder as a foreign-file-format drive, in the same way as it
            would mount a Windows drive. That means that files on it would not
            have the Mac-standard data fork/resource fork structure. On a Windows
            drive (if writable) the resource material for each visible folder is
            kept organised by two invisible folders in it (warning to hackers:
            these folders are created if you so much as open the visible folder
            and are a dead giveaway that some Mac user has been poking around in
            the Windows filing system).

            One of the invisible folders is an extension for the Finder database
            and maps the files to their parent applications using the four-letter
            Creator code. This means that such files (including applications,
            which all have the same "APPL" Type code and their own Creator code)
            can be opened with a double click and will show up as "Excel document"
            or "application program" or whatever rather than just generic "document".

            Probably this applies to Unix drives also.

            I presume that when you double-click an application on an f-f-f drive
            (or any other drive for that matter) its own four-letter code is
            added to a temporary Finder extension file for applications-in-memory,
            so that opening one of its files will call on the
            application-in-memory rather than running a second copy of the
            application from wherever it was stored. This means that the fact that
            the Finder database doesn't KNOW where the application is stored does
            not matter. It does look as if the data for f-f-f drives is not added
            to the Finder database permanently.

            If so, what could one do about it?

            Various things MIGHT work...

            ... Make an alias for the application and leave it on the (SS) desktop.
            ... ... Does it work if you double-click it?
            ... ... Does it work by drag-and-drop? (Drag your file on to the alias
            - it should work like dragging to Trash if it works at all)
            ... ... Can you now double-click to open your file after you quit the
            application?
            ... Edit the Finder database by hand (I've forgotten how this works,
            but it's not nice)
            ... Use Macintosh Easy Open/PC Exchange etc to set up a Finder link
            (might be easier, but I've forgotten how)

            ... must experiment when I have time.

            Bye
            Hugh
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.