From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Bob Copeland" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:43:57 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1208041121-26787-1-git-send-email-me@bobcopeland.com> <20080412205544.5e12a7d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413080130.GA9622@infradead.org> <20080413012001.8d7967f4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080413082815.GA20108@infradead.org> <20080414004521.GA30489@hash.localnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: szaka@ntfs-3g.org, hch@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: "Miklos Szeredi" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > Fuse has two different APIs. For the "high level", path based one, > this is true. The "low level" one is very similar to the one provided > by the VFS. Ah nice, I do not know how I missed that. Thanks for pointing that out. > And I think the VFS is great. Undoubtedly kernel programming has it's > own charm, and I definitely don't want to scare you away from that. > Merging into mainline is a great reward, which must be erned the hard > way. The debate is just part of that ;) > > I also want to dispel any myths surrounding fuse, because those help > nobody. Sure. I'll go on record saying that omfs_fuse was written over a weekend and can not be considered a good example of anything. I already had a proto-libomfs that I had made for omfsck and mkomfs, and wanted to see how easy it would be to wire that stuff up into a FUSE fs. Pretty easily, it turned out. -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com