> > How goes the attempt to get FUSE merged into Andrew or Linus' tree?
> > I saw that an attempt was made about three weeks ago on the LKML.
>
> I made some changes to the kernel code since the last submission
> (related to being able to interrupt requests), and some problems still
> need to be ironed out. Then I'll submit again, hopefully this time
> with more success :)
Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
So if any of you would like to support this motion, you can mail the
linux-kernel list and maybe Linus and Andrew, to generate a little
discussion on why (or why not) inclusion is a good idea.
Thanks,
Miklos
El Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:49:35 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> escribi?:
> So if any of you would like to support this motion, you can mail the
> linux-kernel list and maybe Linus and Andrew, to generate a little
> discussion on why (or why not) inclusion is a good idea.
Personally I think it's cool for "desktops" and other reasons because:
-It could replace gnome-vfs AND kioslaves by a more generic solution that works
for all environments
-You could implement several "not-performance-critical" filesystems (fat,
isofs) with FUSE to avoid possible security issues. Give that nowadays
usb sticks and cd/dvds are so common it'd be possible to modify a filesystem
on purpose to crash the kernel if a bug were found in those filesytems. With
FUSE that posibility decreases.
-Since you can use other programming languages, I suposse it'd be easier for
people to write support for weird filesystems.
-Better for kernel (less code to maintain given a big number of filesystems)
and less pressure for VFS developers when making big changes to the VFS.
-Possibility to write stupid filesystems like "gmailfs".
> -You could implement several "not-performance-critical" filesystems (fat,
> isofs) with FUSE to avoid possible security issues. Give that nowadays
> usb sticks and cd/dvds are so common it'd be possible to modify a filesystem
> on purpose to crash the kernel if a bug were found in those filesytems. With
> FUSE that posibility decreases.
One of my pet ideas, is a userspace loopback mounter, which would use
UML to actually mount an image, and export the resulting filesystem
through FUSE to the host.
Brilliant isn't it?
Miklos
On Wednesday 12 January 2005 14:31, Diego Calleja wrote:
> -It could replace gnome-vfs AND kioslaves by a more generic solution that
> works for all environments
kioslaves such as camera, smb, etc.. are obvious to replace (and this has
already happened from what I can see), and I think are a good idea. We have a
single mountpoint for these things, for example:
/camera/mycamera/picture1.png
/smb/workgroup/computer/share/file.blah
How would you go about replacing a kioslaves which operate "somewhere in the
middle" (i dunno the correct technical term) such as tar? In other words how
would tar:/home/foo/bar.tar.bz2/baz/picture.png work with a FUSE (so
reiserfs4 is not a valid answer to this question) filesystem?
Just some thoughts,
Florian
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 03:31:31PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> El Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:49:35 +0100 Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> escribi?:
> > Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> > kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
> >
> > So if any of you would like to support this motion, you can mail the
> > linux-kernel list and maybe Linus and Andrew, to generate a little
> > discussion on why (or why not) inclusion is a good idea.
>
> -Possibility to write stupid filesystems like "gmailfs".
Not to mention Fuse::DBI which allows you to mount relational database
as a file-system. Imagine editing templates from your CMS with vi. Joy,
right?
Back to serious notes, having ability to write filesystems in user-space
is something that micro kernels (like HURD or plan9) had for a long time
and it's extremely useful if file-system semantic is mappable to problem
at hand.
That would also help reduce kernel bloat because you could write
something like umsdos in user-space where it belongs in first place.
--
Dobrica Pavlinusic 2share!2flame [email protected]
Unix addict. Internet consultant. http://www.rot13.org/~dpavlin
Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
people using them for?
Hi!
> > > How goes the attempt to get FUSE merged into Andrew or Linus' tree?
> > > I saw that an attempt was made about three weeks ago on the LKML.
> >
> > I made some changes to the kernel code since the last submission
> > (related to being able to interrupt requests), and some problems still
> > need to be ironed out. Then I'll submit again, hopefully this time
> > with more success :)
>
> Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
> So if any of you would like to support this motion, you can mail the
> linux-kernel list and maybe Linus and Andrew, to generate a little
> discussion on why (or why not) inclusion is a good idea.
I like fuse, but I do not think Linus and Akpm have enough mails already. Getting it merged to some distribution might
do the trick....
Pavel
--
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
Andrew Morton wrote:
> heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
> people using them for?
Im using the LUFS bridge from time to time for nice access to remote
filesystems over ssh. I also plan to use the bluetooth filesystem (btfs)
as soon as I get my #/%" bluetooth adapter working again ;)
For a list of other more or less serious filesystems (as gmailfs)
checkout http://fuse.sourceforge.net/filesystems.html
--
Regards,
Christian
> > Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> > kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
> heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
> people using them for?
Sshfs (idea shamelessly stolen from the LUFS project). If you can ssh
to some host you can also mount it as a normal user like this:
mkdir /tmp/kempelen
sshfs mszeredi@kempelen: /tmp/kempelen
It pretty much trumps all other network filesystems wrt ease of server
setup, it's secure, efficient, all you need in a network filesystem :)
(available from http://sourceforge.net/projects/fuse; needs
fuse-2.2-pre3 and libglib-2.0)
Miklos
El Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:01:09 -0800 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> escribi?:
> Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> > kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
> heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
> people using them for?
I know of several gmailfs users (mount your 1GB-space gmail account an use it
to get put things and retrieve them anywhere)
(If it gets into mainline people will probably stop developing things for
gnome-vfs/kioslave and use FUSE instead for "desktops")
Hi!
> > I like fuse, but I do not think Linus and Akpm have enough mails
> > already. Getting it merged to some distribution might do the
> > trick....
>
> I know debian and gentoo already carry packages. It doesn't get it
> closer to inclusion though.
Does Debian carry kernel patched with FUSE patches by default?
Pavel
PS: IIRC and not speaking for suse: I think suse was seriously
thinking about using FUSE by default. It did not work well enough back
then. Not sure who exactly was working on it...
--
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
On Wed, Jan 12, 2005 at 09:51:57PM +0100, Diego Calleja wrote:
> (If it gets into mainline people will probably stop developing things for
> gnome-vfs/kioslave and use FUSE instead for "desktops")
Not likely. GNOME/KDE are crossplatform. FUSE is Linux specific.
--
Tomasz Torcz Only gods can safely risk perfection,
[email protected] it's a dangerous thing for a man. -- Alia
> I like fuse, but I do not think Linus and Akpm have enough mails
> already. Getting it merged to some distribution might do the
> trick....
I know debian and gentoo already carry packages. It doesn't get it
closer to inclusion though.
Miklos
> Does Debian carry kernel patched with FUSE patches by default?
No.
> Pavel
> PS: IIRC and not speaking for suse: I think suse was seriously
> thinking about using FUSE by default. It did not work well enough back
> then. Not sure who exactly was working on it...
Well, they never talked with me about it.
Thanks,
Miklos
> Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
I'm a little bit confused... a few weeks ago I read a thread regarding
the remove of some - unneeded ? - symbols from IEEE1394 core. Some
persons in the discussion told, that everything should be included into
kernel mainline, cause if not, symbols needed may be removed.
Now here is the discussion about including FUSE into kernel... So WHAT?
In any case, I do not think that FUSE, compiled in as module, could
bother someone.
regards
Bernhard
Hi!
> > -You could implement several "not-performance-critical" filesystems (fat,
> > isofs) with FUSE to avoid possible security issues. Give that nowadays
> > usb sticks and cd/dvds are so common it'd be possible to modify a filesystem
> > on purpose to crash the kernel if a bug were found in those filesytems. With
> > FUSE that posibility decreases.
>
> One of my pet ideas, is a userspace loopback mounter, which would use
> UML to actually mount an image, and export the resulting filesystem
> through FUSE to the host.
>
> Brilliant isn't it?
Uh, yes, it actually makes sense.
OTOH perhaps porting linux's vfs to userland would be better idea.
People would like to tap on .iso images in mc to open them, but running
full UML to do this is little heavy-weight solution.
Pavel
--
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
Hi!
> > Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> > kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
> heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
> people using them for?
Right now, every project (mc, gnome, kde) has their own vfs implementation,
so that they can work transparently over ftp, handle archives, etc.
Done properly, userspace filesystem like fuse can unify those, plus provide better caching.
It also has chance to be a place for niche filesystems (like atari800) that would be too much pain to keep in kernel.
Pavel
--
64 bytes from 195.113.31.123: icmp_seq=28 ttl=51 time=448769.1 ms
On 12 Jan 2005, Diego Calleja said:
> -Since you can use other programming languages, I suposse it'd be easier for
> people to write support for weird filesystems.
Very weird, since the FUSE C library layer is small enough that if needs
be you can rewrite *that* in other languages as well.
I have plans for a Guile version of the userspace part of FUSE, for
instance, and some filesystems written in Guile: you certainly couldn't
do *that* in the kernel.
--
`Blish is clearly in love with language. Unfortunately,
language dislikes him intensely.' --- Russ Allbery
Andrew Morton wrote:
>Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
>> kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
>heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
>people using them for?
At Plasmon we've developed a userland driver for our new UDO (Ultra
Density Optical) drive using FUSE. To avoid the complexity of
supporting a native 8KB sector size directly in kernel, we have
instead used FUSE to allow us to work on filesystems in
userland. That's made life _very_ much easier for us...
FUSE is very cool - there are many useful things that can be done with
it. Kudos to Miklos and others for their work on it!
--
Steve McIntyre, Plasmon [email protected]
For more information on UDO, visit http://www.udo.com
Il Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:01:09 -0800, Andrew Morton <[email protected]> ha scritto:
> Miklos Szeredi <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Well, there doesn't seem to be a great rush to include FUSE in the
> > kernel. Maybe they just don't realize what they are missing out on ;)
>
> heh. What userspace filesystems have thus-far been developed, and what are
> people using them for?
For my master laurea thesis I developed PackageFS that aims to
transparently manage packages in several distros.
There are also many other facilities:
- View a directory-based tree of packages (with the files that each package owns)
which can be nested by category, or by priority
In the future
- you will be able to add users to "packages" group to make them able
to manage packages
- you can mount the file system on a cluster to transparently manage
several hosts
You can find my thesis at http://packagefs.sourceforge.net
I think FUSE is a very good idea (as good as the actual implementation is),
IMHO it should be inserted in the mainline kernel.
Thanks to Miklos and other developers.
Luca
--
Non ci toglieranno mai....la LIBERTA'!!!
Luca Ferroni
ICQ #317977679
http://www.cs.unibo.it/~fferroni/