Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161141AbVICFcA (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 01:32:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161144AbVICFcA (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 01:32:00 -0400 Received: from rev.193.226.233.176.euroweb.hu ([193.226.233.176]:54791 "EHLO dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161141AbVICFb7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Sep 2005 01:31:59 -0400 To: akpm@osdl.org CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, torvalds@osdl.org In-reply-to: <20050902153440.309d41a5.akpm@osdl.org> (message from Andrew Morton on Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:34:40 -0700) Subject: Re: FUSE merging? References: <20050902153440.309d41a5.akpm@osdl.org> Message-Id: From: Miklos Szeredi Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 07:31:34 +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1811 Lines: 44 > Haven't thought about it all much. Have spent most of my time in the last > month admiring the contents of kernel bugzilla, and the ongoing attempts to > increase them. A penal system could be created, for example if someone is caught introducing a bug, he will have to choose three additional reports from bugzilla and analyze/fix them ;) > > - number of language bindings: 7 (native: C, java, python, perl, > > - C#, sh, TCL) 8 now, someone just sent a private mail about bindings for the Pliant (never heard of it) language. > I agree that lots of people would like the functionality. I regret that > although it appears that v9fs could provide it, I think you are wrong there. You don't appreciate all the complexity FUSE _lacks_ by not being network transparent. Just look at the error text to errno conversion muck that v9fs has. And their problems with trying to do generic uid/gid mappings. > there seems to be no interest in working on that. It would mean adding a plethora of extensions to the 9P protocol, that would take away all it's beauty. I think you should realize that these are different interfaces for different purposes. There may be some overlap, but not enough to warrant trying to massage them into one big ball. > The main sticking point with FUSE remains the permission tricks around > fuse_allow_task(). AFAIK it remains the case that nobody has come up with > any better idea, so I'm inclined to merge the thing. Do you promise? I can do a resplit and submit to Linus, if that takes some load off you. Thanks, Miklos - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/