Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 3 Aug 2017 13:57:05 +0200
From:      Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <20170803115705.agsg6dm745dsriab@ivaldir.net>
In-Reply-To: <87y3r0ankb.fsf@vostro.rath.org>
References:  <87y3r0ankb.fsf@vostro.rath.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--tyyvnr6ejsjlsjcb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:38:28PM +0200, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Hello,
>=20
> I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve
> the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require
> any FreeBSD specific patches.
>=20
> After taking a look at
> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/tree/master/sbin/mount_fusefs,
> https://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/fusefs-libs/, and
> https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/173, it seems to me that:
>=20
> - A lot of upstream code that was actually intended to support FreeBSD
>   is actually patched out when libfuse is installed via ports.
>=20
> - The mount.fusefs and fusermount binaries are not installed from
>   libfuse at all, and are instead provided by a "sysutils/fusefs-libs"
>   package(?)
>=20
> - Some additional patches are necessary to get libfuse to work.
>=20
>=20
> Is that correct so far, or am I looking at the wrong place?

Yes it it :)
>=20
>=20
> If so, my tentative plan would be to:
> =20
> - Not build fusermount and mount.fusefs on FreeBSD at all. This would
>   allow getting rid of mount_bsd.c (and the corresponding patch)
>   completely.

It is correct, we don't need those (not that right now the package fusefs-l=
ibs
is a bit wrong because it still installs the fusermount manpage beside not
installing the utility itself.)
>  =20
> - Integrate the helper.c patch upstream using #ifdefs

Correct
>=20
> - As far as I can tell, the mount_util.[ch] patch is a no-op that should
>   be dropped anyway.

Correct the patch are leftovers from the time we didn't have mount_fusefs in
base, so they are now "useless" for us.
>=20
>=20
> Personally, I don't use FreeBSD and I don't have an easy way to test on
> FreeBSD either. So I would appreciate any input.

I can help you testing if you need, do not hesitate to bother me :)

Best regards,
Bapt

--tyyvnr6ejsjlsjcb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=GLVU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--tyyvnr6ejsjlsjcb--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170803115705.agsg6dm745dsriab>