From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nikolaus Rath Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse.4: Add new file describing /dev/fuse Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 07:31:06 -0800 Message-ID: <871sxea3et.fsf@vostro.rath.org> References: <20161210072018.GA5267@juliacomputing.com> <87vaurbi7q.fsf@vostro.rath.org> <1557a45c-8282-d181-1533-0204895ddc9b@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1557a45c-8282-d181-1533-0204895ddc9b-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> (Michael Kerrisk's message of "Sun, 11 Dec 2016 10:28:37 +0100") Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: Keno Fischer , linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Miklos Szeredi , linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Dec 11 2016, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" wrot= e: > On 12/10/2016 10:13 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> On Dec 10 2016, Keno Fischer wrote: >>> This is my writeup of a basic description of /dev/fuse after playing wi= th >>> it for a few hours today. It is of course woefully incomplete, and since >>> I neither have a use case nor am working on this code, I will not be >>> in a position to expand it in the near future. However, I'm hoping this >>> could still serve as a handy reference for others looking at this inter= face. >>=20 >> That's great! It makes me wonder: >>=20 >> At the moment, libfuse ships a mount.fuse(8) manpage that documents both >> the mount options that can be passed to the kernel, and the pseudo-mount >> options that can be used when using libfuse (but that are actually >> implemented in userspace). >>=20 >> Would it make sense to remove everything kernel related from >> mount.fuse(8) and move it into linux-manpages? >>=20 >> Here's the manpage I'm talking about: >> https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/blob/master/doc/mount.fuse.8 > > I can see pros and cons. mount(8) does a similar thing > for mount options understood by the kernel. So there is precedent > for the approach taken in mount.fuse.8 The difference is that all the options in mount(8) are meant to be used by the user calling mount, while a good fraction of the (kernel) mount options for FUSE filesystems are not meant to be passed by the user but must be generated by the filesystem internally. Best, -Nikolaus --=20 GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F =C2=BBTime flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.=C2= =AB -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:40716 "EHLO out4-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932088AbcLKPbJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Dec 2016 10:31:09 -0500 From: Nikolaus Rath To: "Michael Kerrisk \(man-pages\)" Cc: Keno Fischer , linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse.4: Add new file describing /dev/fuse References: <20161210072018.GA5267@juliacomputing.com> <87vaurbi7q.fsf@vostro.rath.org> <1557a45c-8282-d181-1533-0204895ddc9b@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 07:31:06 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1557a45c-8282-d181-1533-0204895ddc9b@gmail.com> (Michael Kerrisk's message of "Sun, 11 Dec 2016 10:28:37 +0100") Message-ID: <871sxea3et.fsf@vostro.rath.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Dec 11 2016, "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" wrot= e: > On 12/10/2016 10:13 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> On Dec 10 2016, Keno Fischer wrote: >>> This is my writeup of a basic description of /dev/fuse after playing wi= th >>> it for a few hours today. It is of course woefully incomplete, and since >>> I neither have a use case nor am working on this code, I will not be >>> in a position to expand it in the near future. However, I'm hoping this >>> could still serve as a handy reference for others looking at this inter= face. >>=20 >> That's great! It makes me wonder: >>=20 >> At the moment, libfuse ships a mount.fuse(8) manpage that documents both >> the mount options that can be passed to the kernel, and the pseudo-mount >> options that can be used when using libfuse (but that are actually >> implemented in userspace). >>=20 >> Would it make sense to remove everything kernel related from >> mount.fuse(8) and move it into linux-manpages? >>=20 >> Here's the manpage I'm talking about: >> https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/blob/master/doc/mount.fuse.8 > > I can see pros and cons. mount(8) does a similar thing > for mount options understood by the kernel. So there is precedent > for the approach taken in mount.fuse.8 The difference is that all the options in mount(8) are meant to be used by the user calling mount, while a good fraction of the (kernel) mount options for FUSE filesystems are not meant to be passed by the user but must be generated by the filesystem internally. Best, -Nikolaus --=20 GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F =C2=BBTime flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.=C2= =AB