On 10/28/10 14:35, Vincent Hoffman wrote: > On 28/10/2010 12:49, Ivan Voras wrote: >> Hello, >> > <snip much> >> Basically, this is a call for help in working on fusefs. There are >> several developers and users willing to do testing and such but no >> available developers with their hands in the guts of VFS to squash the >> buried bugs. Fusefs might be especially relevant to desktop users and >> as such to PC-BSD developers, so I'm cc-ing Kris in case he has a >> comment. >> >> Is anyone interested? >> > > Would it not make more sense to take the work done here: > http://wiki.freebsd.org/SOC2009TatsianaSeveryna > forward? (not volunteering, just wondering what with the licensing and > all.) Hello, No, the puffs port is in about the same state as fusefs, and fusefs has these benefits over it: * More file systems are developed for fuse (an incomplete list is here: http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/fuse/index.php?title=FileSystems) * It's more popular both among the users and 3d party software developers (like Gnome) * It's better performing, at least in theory, because puffs was not originally written for a multi-threaded kernel (lots of serialization) Licensing isn't a problem since the fuse kernel module is developed from scratch under the BSDL.Received on Thu Oct 28 2010 - 11:05:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:08 UTC