State of FUSE on FreeBSD
Hello, I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require any FreeBSD specific patches. After taking a look at https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/tree/master/sbin/mount_fusefs, https://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/fusefs-libs/, and https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/173, it seems to me that: - A lot of upstream code that was actually intended to support FreeBSD is actually patched out when libfuse is installed via ports. - The mount.fusefs and fusermount binaries are not installed from libfuse at all, and are instead provided by a "sysutils/fusefs-libs" package(?) - Some additional patches are necessary to get libfuse to work. Is that correct so far, or am I looking at the wrong place? If so, my tentative plan would be to: - Not build fusermount and mount.fusefs on FreeBSD at all. This would allow getting rid of mount_bsd.c (and the corresponding patch) completely. - Integrate the helper.c patch upstream using #ifdefs - As far as I can tell, the mount_util.[ch] patch is a no-op that should be dropped anyway. Personally, I don't use FreeBSD and I don't have an easy way to test on FreeBSD either. So I would appreciate any input. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:38:28PM +0200, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Hello, > > I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve > the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require > any FreeBSD specific patches. > > After taking a look at > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/tree/master/sbin/mount_fusefs, > https://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/fusefs-libs/, and > https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/173, it seems to me that: > > - A lot of upstream code that was actually intended to support FreeBSD > is actually patched out when libfuse is installed via ports. > > - The mount.fusefs and fusermount binaries are not installed from > libfuse at all, and are instead provided by a "sysutils/fusefs-libs" > package(?) > > - Some additional patches are necessary to get libfuse to work. > > > Is that correct so far, or am I looking at the wrong place? Yes it it :) > > > If so, my tentative plan would be to: > > - Not build fusermount and mount.fusefs on FreeBSD at all. This would > allow getting rid of mount_bsd.c (and the corresponding patch) > completely. It is correct, we don't need those (not that right now the package fusefs-libs is a bit wrong because it still installs the fusermount manpage beside not installing the utility itself.) > > - Integrate the helper.c patch upstream using #ifdefs Correct > > - As far as I can tell, the mount_util.[ch] patch is a no-op that should > be dropped anyway. Correct the patch are leftovers from the time we didn't have mount_fusefs in base, so they are now "useless" for us. > > > Personally, I don't use FreeBSD and I don't have an easy way to test on > FreeBSD either. So I would appreciate any input. I can help you testing if you need, do not hesitate to bother me :) Best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
On 3/8/17 7:38 pm, Nikolaus Rath wrote: Hello, I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require any FreeBSD specific patches. Hi, great to hear from you! at $JOB we use libfuse and We have always worried that we don't really have anyone in FreeBSD that really has fuse as a priority. Rick Maclem has looked at it a little, as have a few people (see the commit logs) but generally as long as it more or less works, people tend to steer clear of it. For us libfuse "just worked" so we haven't touched it. We had to touch the kernel part of fuse a little so remove some overly restrictive permission checks, and fix some issues to do with page boundaries (from memory) but nothing in the library. After taking a look at https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/tree/master/sbin/mount_fusefs, https://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head/sysutils/fusefs-libs/, and https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/173, it seems to me that: - A lot of upstream code that was actually intended to support FreeBSD is actually patched out when libfuse is installed via ports. - The mount.fusefs and fusermount binaries are not installed from libfuse at all, and are instead provided by a "sysutils/fusefs-libs" package(?) that may be possible, We just mount by doing calls to the library in our code so I haven't looked at it. - Some additional patches are necessary to get libfuse to work. Is that correct so far, or am I looking at the wrong place? If so, my tentative plan would be to: - Not build fusermount and mount.fusefs on FreeBSD at all. This would allow getting rid of mount_bsd.c (and the corresponding patch) completely. I don't think I've ever seen them used. - Integrate the helper.c patch upstream using #ifdefs - As far as I can tell, the mount_util.[ch] patch is a no-op that should be dropped anyway. Personally, I don't use FreeBSD and I don't have an easy way to test on FreeBSD either. So I would appreciate any input. got vmware or Xen or virtualBox or HyperV? we provide a bunch of virtual images. Best, -Nikolaus ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
A grateful note of thanks for this effort, especially to Nikolaus Rath and the FreeBSD maintainers! On 08/03/17 13:22, Julian Elischer wrote: On 3/8/17 7:38 pm, Nikolaus Rath wrote: Hello, I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require any FreeBSD specific patches. For us libfuse "just worked" so we haven't touched it. We had to touch the kernel part of fuse a little so remove some overly restrictive permission checks, and fix some issues to do with page boundaries (from memory) but nothing in the library. -- Patrick Powell Astart Technologies papow...@astart.com1530 Jamacha Rd, Suite X Network and System San Diego, CA 92019 Consulting Cell 858-518-7581 FAX 858-751-2435 Web: papowell at astart dot com ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
On Aug 05 2017, Patrick Powell wrote: > A grateful note of thanks for this effort, especially to Nikolaus > Rath and the FreeBSD maintainers! Well, as I said in my other mail, it would be great if someone could give the git master branch a try on FreeBSD Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
On Aug 04 2017, Julian Elischer wrote: >> Personally, I don't use FreeBSD and I don't have an easy way to test on >> FreeBSD either. So I would appreciate any input. > > got vmware or Xen or virtualBox or HyperV? > > we provide a bunch of virtual images. Certainly. But it's not the lack of a computer / VM to run it on that stops me, but my lack of familiarity for the system. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: State of FUSE on FreeBSD
> On 03 Aug 2017, at 22:22, Julian Elischer wrote: > > On 3/8/17 7:38 pm, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am the upstream maintainer of libfuse. I'd like to refresh / improve >> the FreeBSD support in libfuse. My goal is for libfuse not to require >> any FreeBSD specific patches. > > Hi, great to hear from you! > at $JOB we use libfuse and We have always worried that we don't really > have anyone in FreeBSD that really has fuse as a priority. Glad to hear from Nikolaus too, seeing that efforts are taken to keep libfuse FreeBSD compatible out of the box ! For sure this is great ! I also hugely use fuse, so having it to work correctly (at least bug-free) is mandatory for me. > Rick Maclem has looked at it a little, as have a few people (see the commit > logs) > but generally as long as it more or less works, people tend to steer > clear of it. > > For us libfuse "just worked" so we haven't touched it. > We had to touch the kernel part of fuse a little so remove some overly > restrictive > permission checks, and fix some issues to do with page boundaries (from > memory) > but nothing in the library. I've also reported a few bugs which were in kernel, and have been corrected thanks to the great FreeBSD community. Fuse kernel support lacks some features, such as entry_timeout / attr_timeout (reported), but it then concerns kernel, not libfuse. Thx ! Ben ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
