> Well, as discussed in various places before, FUSE is pretty useless, > because it (a) works at the wrong level and (b) is limited to Linux 2.4 > and 2.6. > > Doing remote file system abstraction in the kernels VFS layer is exactly > the wrong abstraction level, as that limits you to the POSIX API, which > is certainly not what you want in 99% of all (desktop use) cases, esp. > not within a smart file manager. E.g. there's no way for backends to > pass additional information (like the suggested mime type, metadata, > capabilities, etc.) to the application; you are limited to the plain > POSIX API. And even worse, the POSIX API imposes requirements on the > backend that require awful hacks to make it work with some remote > filesystems.
Still, a "simple" file manager, as thunar is supposed to be, should work with files, as provided by the operating system vfs interface. I think the FUSE approach is the right one, it is not the job of a simple filemanager to provide a separate, better vfs layer. I hope xfce4 is not turning into an alternative GNOME/KDE beast and thunar not into nautilus/konqueror because GNOME/KDE already exist. I always thought xfce is supposed to be an alternative for people that like to do without all that additional, costly stuff. A separate vfs layer certainly would go into that direction. Tim > >> just my 2p >> Jaap > > Just my 0,019€, > > Benedikt > _______________________________________________ > Thunar-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list [email protected] http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
