From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263331AbVGANKU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:10:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263334AbVGANIU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:08:20 -0400 Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.130]:16004 "EHLO ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263330AbVGANHn (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:07:43 -0400 X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Subject: Re: FUSE merging? From: Anton Altaparmakov To: Andrew Morton Cc: Miklos Szeredi , arjan@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, frankvm@frankvm.com In-Reply-To: <1120222434.23346.16.camel@imp.csi.cam.ac.uk> References: <20050630022752.079155ef.akpm@osdl.org> <1120125606.3181.32.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1120126804.3181.34.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1120129996.5434.1.camel@imp.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20050630124622.7c041c0b.akpm@osdl.org> <20050630235059.0b7be3de.akpm@osdl.org> <20050701001439.63987939.akpm@osdl.org> <20050701010229.4214f04e.akpm@osdl.org> <20050701042955.39bf46ef.akpm@osdl.org> <1120222434.23346.16.camel@imp.csi.cam.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Computing Service, University of Cambridge, UK Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 14:07:28 +0100 Message-Id: <1120223248.23346.23.camel@imp.csi.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 (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/