Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: OS-X and missing file extensions Date: 29 Apr 2017 18:19:35 GMT Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <59040090$0$34646$b1db1813$15bdbe48@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 04yCZpcaY7mcbbTME0xuKQHJzzCYSZt7f3/A95DUsSXqfl8xoj Cancel-Lock: sha1:sZfPVnVNPdfdqJ4IeFj33icGlbw= sha1:2NrdcVOGXkeq56sLn/ocTsYfvSk= User-Agent: NewsTap/5.2.6 (iPhone/iPod Touch) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:105856 Siri Cruise wrote: >>> Out of curiosity, how come in Finder, when I do a Quicklook on those >>> files, it knows they are all AIFF and is able to play the sounds? >>> >>> Does Finder still look in a "resource fork" when there is no file >>> extension? (I take it file extension takes precedence). >> >> Resource Forks only exist on applications ... but "Classic" Mac OS > > From System 1984 through System 9 files had two forks and both could be > populated. Files can (and many do) still have multiple forks today in the latest version of macOS as long as the file system is HFS. > Even on HFS the resource fork now is usually a separate, hidden file which > allows generic unix programs to find it. Yes. Often, but not always. Some files (like aliases) still have resource forks, though it's less common now. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR