From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 4 18:25:49 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE47930F; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:25:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-x229.google.com (mail-qc0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B50E1A3C; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:25:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id w7so14372232qcr.14 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=8XnxktX6W9tSVeE3IU7Z1fZr50AGGXDcnk+JKZRxp6o=; b=HSQ5cNXr2X7Yd/Gt9Q6QBjCVmDmPhIngBbPpHv5BM+VUqGeffa2hrJ5Og7PqzKThKv kMNG0A+xEQRXoXDw9FlGcDMhUVl72r/M4eZkXvSLXsV/cMY0j/xua8IQ5qD2x9V1kPr7 H4jThUNDMj378FTErWiOoJqebOeNa3hYBG7ssM6946aXU3cTc8EeByUi/DId9rVagjES JZM7gDdQ7pD07h5XzGTI2GLSnUmTRk3qJK56OOiFNF+5+7WFb9LDBDOm80y7GurMdfSD L98Uj08xdvrBStoURNa4iE+NtC/BlyadZE3UT7/dwD8ewDBkRosHEKMbAWbCayMs08IK f+AQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.121.137 with SMTP id h9mr58790160qar.55.1391538348588; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) Sender: tomek.cedro@gmail.com Received: by 10.229.151.73 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:25:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 19:25:48 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1rzBG4KDxjiwhU7TkMs01H_b71A Message-ID: Subject: Re: poor fusefs documentation From: CeDeROM To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Filesystems Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:25:49 -0000 On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:34 PM, CeDeROM wrote: > In example - I need to mount cryptofs or ntfs, I guess mount_fusefs > should be used for that with proper "-t" option like in standard mount > program or some automatic fs recognition should take place, but > instead, I must use dedicated cryptofs application with no manual > page, and there is no application for ntfs, apropos can tell nothing > about both cryptofs and ntfs. This looks so Linux :-( In a perfect situation I would see mount_fusefs to be a frontend for other filesystem loaders/modules, so we only use mount_fusefs no other programs, just like ifconfig works. If any other program/loader has a standalone binary I would consider naming it mount_fusefs_{filesystem} to be coherent with the base and rest of the mount framework. It would be nice if mount_fusefs could detect filesystem if a proper loader is found. I know that fusefs modules/loaders are part of the port tree, but they should also contain man/info, apropos pages and stick to the current FreeBSD naming conventions I guess. This way we could get coherent support for other filesystems provided by fusefs modules. Please keep the FreeBSD ports "the FreeBSD way" not the "Linux way", so many of us switched to FreeBSD because of that integrity issues =) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info