On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Antonia Horincar <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I'm not sure I know which approach would be easier for this project (the
> one you mentioned - dealing with FUSE systems, or creating resource
> instances (e.g. SkyDrive instance) in order to communicate with the cloud
> storage service). That is because I have no experience with FUSE systems,
> so I can't asses the feasibility (or difficulty) of all this. However, as
> you said, having mounts of different storage services on the system would
> lead to inconsistent instructions for Bloodhound users. So my question is:
> is the project useful for Bloodhound then?
>
>
The only thing about handling this with FUSE is that :
- AFAIK it will not work on Windows
* See platforms in http://goo.gl/#analytics/goo.gl/EMHMvQ/all_time
- It will not be possible to setup such on shared hosting plans
* I'm still investigating whether we can setup this in
blood-hound.netservers.
[...]
--
Regards,
Olemis - @olemislc
