Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:49:43 +0000 (UTC) From: Csaba Henk <csaba-ml@creo.hu> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: TDFS ... or other distributed file system technologies for FreeBSD? Message-ID: <slrnf0ngu5.2ffc.csaba-ml@beastie.creo.hu> References: <4746DA006C148BC0FF1241C6@ganymede.hub.org> <euberg$f1u$1@sea.gmane.org> <45CCECCB7ECB612F504211F3@ganymede.hub.org> <eubmlt$fgp$1@sea.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2007-03-27, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> wrote: > Since FUSE is (L)GPL'ed, chances of getting it into base are slim. Then > there's the question of who would be responsible for it, since the > developer of the FUSE BSD module was also a SoC student and I don't know > if he's interested in maintaining it that way - I'll go ask him. Yep, Ivan asked me so its time for me to chime in. (Thanks for waking me up from my sleeping beauty state.) I think fuse4bsd could and should included into FreeBSD. Why is it not yet there? Those FBSD commiters I talked with gave a positive feedback so the reason is not that anyone had opposed such an addition. The reason is the combination of my perfectionalism and business/laziness. I wanted to achieve certain milestones before asking for having it merged in. I didn't achieve them last year. Now it's time to change strategy. While certain features are missing (and will be for a while), the existing code works well and is not yet bitrotten. So while I might whine to myself about those missing features, the average FUSE based filesystem will run happily with it and I think the average FreeBSD user Joe could be happy with what she gets. To add, much more happier with what is availabe as sysutils/fusefs-kmod from the ports tree -- current fuse4bsd is pretty much superior than version 0.3.0 (the one in ports). So, whom to pester about getting fuse4bsd merged?... Csaba
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?slrnf0ngu5.2ffc.csaba-ml>