backing up from HFSX volume to HFS+, any issues?
 

Just wondering if it's best to keep all mac volumes to either hfs+ or hfsx if one of the volumes is gong to be a central back-up volume?*

Is there any known issues in backing up from a HFSX volume to a HFS+ one?

Cheers
Jed
*if so which one, hfsx or hfs+? I'm more inclined to go with the former as it's more like *nix. I know it had issues 4+ years back, but it should be fine now.

You should generally maintain the same format on the destination as you do on the source, so if you're copying HFSX volumes, do so to an HFSX destination.

Thanks dnanian,

I've been trying to find some detailed apple doco on the pros/cons of both.

All I've been able to find thus far is Technical Note TN1150
The only other source of info has been silly forum chatter, most of which is highly uninformed & contradictory.

Which would you recommend & why?
The two systems being backed-up are more-or-less general purpose desktops (mac mini's), one is for a very light user.

Let me know if you need to know more first.

curiously,
Jed

Well, if what you're trying to say is you want case-sensitive volumes, I strongly recommend against that, especially for a startup volume. But, in most cases, HFSX is the default these days and should be used.

Why do you recommend against HFSX (case-sensitive) for system volumes?

In your 2nd sentence you seem to be suggesting to use it anyway? I'm confused! LOL

Sorry this must be painful for you, but could you please elaborate further?

HFSX is not case sensitive. HFSX allows case sensitivity. Big difference.

Why do you recommend against HFSX (allows case-sensitivity) for system volumes?

In your 2nd sentence you seem to be suggesting otherwise I'm confused!
Can you please elaborate further?

No, I'm saying that your volume shouldn't be case sensitive. I'm not saying you shouldn't use HFSX.

Case sensitivity can confuse applications that aren't expecting it, since it's not the norm.

But by saying my volume shouldn't be case-sensitive aren't you saying I shouldn't use HFSX, since HFSX "allows" case sensitivity?
Or does HSFX have other inherent qualities which mean I should use it instead of HFS+?

How do I use HFSX but at the same time ensure the volume isn't case-senstive, by being diligent about how I name files/folders?
Sorry for the confusion.....

cheers,
Jed

No. I'm saying that you shouldn't turn on case sensitivity, but you should use HSFX. It's something you'd have to turn on when formatted. Don't.

I see, so why use HFSX at all then?

Cheers,
Jed

Because it supports other, new things like Journaling, hard links, etc.

Okay I must starting with the wrong understanding of definitions.

I'm realising now.... HFSX is just a generic term for;
HFS+ + new journaling features + case sensitivity....

So when I format the volume you're suggesting I go for HFSX, but HFSX in the sense of: "HFS+ + journaling".
NOT; "HFS+ + journaling + case sensitivity".

Cheers

Doh sorry I forgot my own prior reading! ....

"HFSX volumes are almost identical to HFS Plus volumes (journaled or not), except that they are never surrounded by the HFS Wrapper that is typical of HFS Plus volumes and they optionally support case sensitivity for file and folder names"

So to get HSFX, when I format I choose: "Mac OS Extended (Case-Sentivie, Journaled)"
Then after formatted I just be careful not to enable the "optional" case-sensitivity to individual files & folders?

I'm already on "Mac OS Extended (Journaled)" for most of my volumes, what specifically do I miss out on? (aside from option for case-sensitivity)
Just hard-links?

No, just use "Mac OS Extended (Journaled)". DO NOT use Case Sensitive. Everything is basically HFSX these days...