Re: FUSE merging?

[Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>]

On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 13:53 +0100, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 04:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Sorry, but I'm not buying it.  I still don't see a solid reason why all
> > this could not be done with nfs/v9fs, some kernel tweaks and the rest in
> > userspace.  It would take some effort, but that effort would end up
> > strengthening existing kernel capabilities rather than adding brand new
> > things, which is good.
> 
> FUSE is a generic FS API which is _very_ easy to write an FS for
> (learning curve is about 10-15 minutes starting after you have unpacked
> the fuse source code, at least it took me that long to start writing an
> FS based on the example one provided).  NFS is not anything like that.
> 
> Also can the NFS approach provide me with different content depending on
> the uid of the accessing process?  With FUSE that is easy as pie.  Even
> easier than that actually...

I forgot:  And doesn't NFS require stable inode numbers and other
"invariables" like that for it to work?  FUSE doesn't and those
requirements are a real PITA in a lot of cases where there simply are no
inodes and the numbers are synthetic and change on each remount or even
on each access after the dentry has expired...

And I always thought that doing FS in userspace via NFS is considered an
ugly hack.  I didn't have the impression that that had changed recently.
(-;

Best regards,

        Anton
-- 
Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @)
Unix Support, Computing Service, University of Cambridge, CB2 3QH, UK
Linux NTFS maintainer / IRC: #ntfs on irc.freenode.net
WWW: http://linux-ntfs.sf.net/ & http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/