| 1 |
On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 00:41:33 +0000 |
| 2 |
Daniel Drake <dsd@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Sebastian Dröge wrote: |
| 5 |
> > But a generic userspace filesystem is the cleaner solution for |
| 6 |
> > something which needs a userspace application to work... why |
| 7 |
> > should one develop the same parts over and over again when there's |
| 8 |
> > a generic solution for such things? smbfs/cifs could also be |
| 9 |
> > implemented this way much cleaner |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Are you just arguing a point, or does lufs actually work for you? I |
| 12 |
> once tried a few of the lufs "modules" and all were extremely |
| 13 |
> unreliable. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Daniel |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I'm just arguing from the design point of view... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
(but i've used fuse with siefs in the past to access the filesystem on |
| 20 |
my cellphone and it worked...) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Homepage: http://slomosnail.de |
| 24 |
PGP/GPG Public Key: 0x5BE41F21 at http://slomosnail.de/files/gpg.asc |
Archives