[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: More compatibility for refuse
manu%netbsd.org@localhost (Emmanuel Dreyfus) writes:
> <coypu%sdf.org@localhost> wrote:
>> I'm just going to commit code without code review if all the responses
>> are going to be "please don't work on X, work on Y instead".
>> I am interested in librefuse because that's what gets used.
> Sure, go ahead for the short term, but my point is that in the long run,
> your life could be easier by just linking FUSE filesystems with the real
> libfuse instead of librefuse.
I am not following two things:
Do you think that (for things that use the high-level API) it is
better to use (upstream, via pkgsrc) libfuse and perfuse, instead of
using librefuse? If so, could you explain why? It seems to me to add
a layer of indirection and a daemon.
It seems the underlying problem is that upstream libfuse is not good
about compatibility, and thus filesystems that haven't update to the
30 API are troubled.
Main Index |
Thread Index |