On 10 Sep 2009, at 04:19, Erik Larsson wrote: >> … 64-bit kernel.
> I don't think forking the project is a very appealing idea Agreed. > if the main project is stagnant Whilst <http://code.google.com/p/macfuse/source/list> shows not many recent changes, let's not forget that experimental support for Snow Leopard was extraordinarily early -- December 2008. > We'll just have to work together as a community then, to fix any > Snow Leopard issues Distinguishing between 64-bit processing, bitness of the kernel, Snow Leopard Server and Snow Leopard: * what's the rush to have MacFUSE (*user* space) working with a 64-bit kernel in a _server_ version of the OS that's not intended for end users? I don't devalue any community work in progress, but I wonder whether development of MacFUSE should focus, currently, on issues that affect the more common version of 10.6. (Issues that affect MacFUSE on 10.6 Server in 64-bit kernel mode may take a sideline. Assuming that it will be some time before there exist enough everyday drivers etc. to make a 64-bit kernel practical for the masses using ordinary Snow Leopard.) Is my view of things too simplistic? References: <http://code.google.com/p/macfuse/wiki/CHANGELOG> <http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3696> <http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2937> <http://www.osxbook.com/blog/2009/08/31/is-your-machine-good-enough-for-snow-leopard-k64/ > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacFUSE" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macfuse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
