This sounds like it was well considered and thoroughly researched.
There are going to be a lot of Darwin systems out there, and being
able to deal with their file systems will be a Good Thing.

-dgl-

>[ posted to tech-kern@netbsd.org, and Bcc'd to port-macppc and port-next68k.
>  Please direct discussion to tech-kern@netbsd.org. ]
>
>I have submitted the pr kern/17345 which contains patches to support
>Apple's UFS file system under NetBSD.  Their version of UFS is very similar
>to our FFS with some minor changes, mostly inherited from NeXTstep.
>The PR can be retrieved on the web at:
>  <URL:http://www.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/query-pr-single.pl?number=17345>
>
>I would like to pursue a review and discussion in the tech-kern@netbsd.org
>email forum prior to possibly committing the patches contained in the PR.
>What follows is a brief review of information in the PR, as well as some
>insight into the decisions involved and a glimpse at alternate options.
>
>Last December, I posted an analysis of the differences in the Apple UFS
>file system to the port-macppc@netbsd.org mailing list:
>  <URL:http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-macppc/2001/12/13/0012.html>
>In addition to the changes discussed in that email, Apple added a
>volume label at offset 7k, just before the super block, which the patches
>optionally use to identify a file system as being Apple UFS.
>
>The most significant difference is that NeXTstep changed the value
>of DIRBLKSIZ from 512 to 1024, most likely for performance.  As long
[snip]