On Monday 26 July 2010 10:29:19 Jeremiah Foster wrote: > I'm not fully convinced there is a need to maintain NFS in MeeGo and I > think everyone would prefer less complexity so perhaps we can define an end > user use case which clearly demonstrates the need for NFS that sshfs > doesn't fill?
I think end-user use cases will be quite rare -- but then that is what the community is for: to support rare or niche end-user requirements. My use case is a developer use case. I am sure I am not the only developer to have my development environment built around NFS. Files live on servers and are accessed over NFS. Workstations, build machines, regression test machines, manual test machines all create, edit or access the files in the same way, over NFS. While NFS is not perfect, it works quite well for this sort of setup and I have been using it for close to 20 years. Many of those machines are virtual, and are running all sorts of strange software (for example I have several different VMs running different Maemo build instances). Not only am I unwilling to completely change my development environment for one target platform, but my use of VMs means I really feel the impact of every CPU cycle expended, particularly in automatic (nightly) builds and automatic testing. My builds already can't all run in one night so some platforms only build every 2 nights. If I had to use sshfs I am sure the slowdown would be very significant and I would be looking at "nightlies" happening every 3 or 4 nights! The lack of NFS means I am currently limited to doing all MeeGo building and testing in chroots, not in VMs. If/when I want to start supporting MeeGo Handset that will probably be a problem. My guess is that this sort of environment is not that unusual. On the other hand, it could be supported just as an SDK configuration, without being available on production systems. Graham _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
