I'm in, let me know what parts you need in dports.
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Tomohiro Kusumi <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm thinking about porting fuse from FreeBSD. Several benefits by doing this. > > 1. There are some good fuse based fs like sshfs, ntfs-3g and maybe > some others I'm not really aware of (like glusterfs if it ever worked > on BSD ?). > > 2. puffs in DragonFly is broken according to other devs/users, and no > one is really going to fix it (which is fine with me too). > > 3. We probably don't need (a broken) puffs if we get (a working) fuse, > given the fact that most userspace filesystems are written for Linux > fuse, but not for NetBSD puffs. NetBSD puffs seems to provide a some > sort of emulation layer for compatibility with fuse, but ours > apparently doesn't because it's broken. > > -- > I haven't written any code yet, and won't be for another 2-3 weeks, > but was looking at fuse (a kernel subsystem in FreeBSD and Linux > kernel), libfuse (userspace portion of fuse) and some specific > filesystem implementations such as sshfs. > > The target will be the next DragonFly release which is 4.8. Not sure > if I can make it if we're to release 4.8 within 2016 (which is only 4 > months from 4.6), but I should be able to make it otherwise with good > enough stability for the initial release. > > The difficult part is that it's kinda difficult to tell how long it > takes to port fuse, given the concept of the fuse itself. It's easy to > imagine some sort of bugs will be exremely difficult to fix or even > investigate. > > I know DragonFly users want ntfs(3g), but the initial release won't > target ntfs. In theory, having fuse subsystem with good stability > should mean it runs ntfs, but ntfs is probably way too complex to make > it reliably work without bunch of try-and-errors within fuse itself. > > sshfs seems to be a good one for dogfooding the fuse on DragonFly once > it starts to work, because sshfs isn't a toy fs (I think it's quite > popular among Linux users) yet the code size isn't that huge, plus > it's written by the same author as fuse in Linux kernel which > guarantees good code quality. > > If porting a kernel subsystem goes as expected, I'll eventually need > marino@ (or someone who is as good) to help with userspace. One of the > issue with libfuse is that ./configure doesn't recognize DragonFly as > a BSD, probably because our uname doesn't contain "BSD" (see around > line 12000 of ./configure), and tries to compile with Linux specific > code (e.g. mount(2) with 5 arguments instead of four). I may be able > to fix these issues myself, but I doubt I do it in a right way. > > I'm also willing to fix any issues I may encounter on FreeBSD. > > If everything goes as expected, we can get rid of puffs in 4.8.
