Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
Alexander Pyhalov wrote: On 08/26/16 12:52 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: No surprise, as it's 755. On Linux I see 666. What is correct approach here? Should we somehow honor console user? Pardon, 600. And next thing which I receive is /usr/lib/fs/fusermount.bin: mount failed: Not owner I do not what this file is for, presumably for mounting as a plain user (which I never do). I have it as /usr/lib/fs/fuse/fusermount.bin with permissions 0555 owned by root:bin Jean-Pierre ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
Alexander Pyhalov wrote: On 08/26/16 12:27 PM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: Adam Števko wrote: Hi, [...] By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam last may. Did you take them into account ? Patches have been delivered since May: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/tree/oi/hipster/components/library/libfuse/patches Though, I have to go through our communication and check if that’s all. I recall I haven’t applied everything. I do not see the one I sent you on May 5th about permissions to set timestamps on files, and I do not remember anybody having objections about it (this has been in fuse-lite and used by ntfs-3g for years). I attach it again, just in case. BTW, when I run just-compiled /usr/lib/gvfs-fuse-daemon, I receive /dev/fuse: Permission denied. No surprise, as it's 755. On Linux I see 666. What is correct approach here? Should we somehow honor console user? /dev/fuse is the interface with the kernel module, created when the module is installed. I have always seen it with permissions 0666 to owner root:sys add_drv -m 'fuse 0666 root sys' fuse ln -s /devices/pseudo/fuse@0:fuse /dev/fuse (See http://jp-andre.pagesperso-orange.fr/openindiana-ntfs-3g.html) Jean-Pierre ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
On 08/26/16 12:52 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: No surprise, as it's 755. On Linux I see 666. What is correct approach here? Should we somehow honor console user? Pardon, 600. And next thing which I receive is /usr/lib/fs/fusermount.bin: mount failed: Not owner -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Southern Federal University IT department ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
On 08/26/16 12:51 PM, Alexander Pyhalov wrote: On 08/26/16 12:27 PM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: Adam Števko wrote: Hi, [...] By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam last may. Did you take them into account ? Patches have been delivered since May: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/tree/oi/hipster/components/library/libfuse/patches Though, I have to go through our communication and check if that’s all. I recall I haven’t applied everything. I do not see the one I sent you on May 5th about permissions to set timestamps on files, and I do not remember anybody having objections about it (this has been in fuse-lite and used by ntfs-3g for years). I attach it again, just in case. BTW, when I run just-compiled /usr/lib/gvfs-fuse-daemon, I receive /dev/fuse: Permission denied. No surprise, as it's 755. On Linux I see 666. What is correct approach here? Should we somehow honor console user? Pardon, 600. -- С уважением, Александр Пыхалов, программист отдела телекоммуникационной инфраструктуры управления информационно-коммуникационной инфраструктуры ЮФУ ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
On 08/26/16 12:27 PM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: Adam Števko wrote: Hi, [...] By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam last may. Did you take them into account ? Patches have been delivered since May: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/tree/oi/hipster/components/library/libfuse/patches Though, I have to go through our communication and check if that’s all. I recall I haven’t applied everything. I do not see the one I sent you on May 5th about permissions to set timestamps on files, and I do not remember anybody having objections about it (this has been in fuse-lite and used by ntfs-3g for years). I attach it again, just in case. BTW, when I run just-compiled /usr/lib/gvfs-fuse-daemon, I receive /dev/fuse: Permission denied. No surprise, as it's 755. On Linux I see 666. What is correct approach here? Should we somehow honor console user? -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Southern Federal University IT department ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
Adam tevko wrote:
Hi,
[...]
By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam
last may. Did you take them into account ?
Patches have been delivered since May:
https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/tree/oi/hipster/components/library/libfuse/patches
Though, I have to go through our communication and check if thats all. I
recall I havent applied everything.
I do not see the one I sent you on May 5th about permissions
to set timestamps on files, and I do not remember anybody
having objections about it (this has been in fuse-lite and
used by ntfs-3g for years).
I attach it again, just in case.
Jean-Pierre
Adam
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
--- fuse.c.ref 2016-05-05 11:24:20.432471400 +0200
+++ fuse.c 2016-05-05 11:26:24.508680800 +0200
@@ -1462,6 +1462,29 @@
else
err = fuse_fs_truncate(f->fs, path, attr->st_size);
}
+#ifdef HAVE_UTIMENSAT
+if (!err &&
+(valid & (FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME | FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME))) {
+struct timespec tv[2];
+
+tv[0].tv_sec = 0;
+tv[1].tv_sec = 0;
+tv[0].tv_nsec = UTIME_OMIT;
+tv[1].tv_nsec = UTIME_OMIT;
+
+if (valid & FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME_NOW)
+tv[0].tv_nsec = UTIME_NOW;
+else if (valid & FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME)
+tv[0] = attr->st_atim;
+
+if (valid & FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME_NOW)
+tv[1].tv_nsec = UTIME_NOW;
+else if (valid & FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME)
+tv[1] = attr->st_mtim;
+
+err = fuse_fs_utimens(f->fs, path, tv);
+} else
+#endif
if (!err && (valid & (FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME | FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME)) ==
(FUSE_SET_ATTR_ATIME | FUSE_SET_ATTR_MTIME)) {
struct timespec tv[2];
___
oi-dev mailing list
oi-dev@openindiana.org
https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
Hi, > On Aug 26, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Jean-Pierre André > wrote: > > Alexander Pyhalov wrote: >> On 08/26/16 09:52 AM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: >> >>> What is the need ? AKAIK gvfs is related to Gnome and >>> is not supported on Linux any more. >> >> I see the following fuse-related errors, trying to compile gvfs with >> fuse support >> >> >> error: 'struct fuse_conn_info' has no member named 'want' > > This field exists in fuse 2.7, it is declared in the fuse-lite > library used by ntfs-3g. > >> error: 'FUSE_CAP_ATOMIC_O_TRUNC' undeclared > > This is one of the bits going into the field "want". Is is > about the file system telling it supports the O_TRUNC as an > argument of open()... which current fuse expects anyway. > > Both can be easily added to fuse_common.h, but this will > not make libfuse to 2.8. > > Patch proposal attached. > > By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam > last may. Did you take them into account ? Patches have been delivered since May: https://github.com/OpenIndiana/oi-userland/tree/oi/hipster/components/library/libfuse/patches Though, I have to go through our communication and check if that’s all. I recall I haven’t applied everything. Adam signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
Alexander Pyhalov wrote: On 08/26/16 09:52 AM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: What is the need ? AKAIK gvfs is related to Gnome and is not supported on Linux any more. I see the following fuse-related errors, trying to compile gvfs with fuse support error: 'struct fuse_conn_info' has no member named 'want' This field exists in fuse 2.7, it is declared in the fuse-lite library used by ntfs-3g. error: 'FUSE_CAP_ATOMIC_O_TRUNC' undeclared This is one of the bits going into the field "want". Is is about the file system telling it supports the O_TRUNC as an argument of open()... which current fuse expects anyway. Both can be easily added to fuse_common.h, but this will not make libfuse to 2.8. Patch proposal attached. By the way, I sent several patches to libfuse to Adam last may. Did you take them into account ? Jean-Pierre As I see, gvfs is still supported: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gvfs/ --- fuse_common.h.old 2010-06-15 16:46:54.0 +0200 +++ fuse_common.h.new 2016-08-26 10:11:15.146085700 +0200 @@ -110,11 +110,23 @@ unsigned max_readahead; /** + * Capability flags, that the filesystem wants to enable + */ +unsigned int want; +/** * For future use. */ -unsigned reserved[27]; +unsigned reserved[26]; }; +/** + * Capability bits for 'fuse_conn_info.capable' and 'fuse_conn_info.want' + * + * FUSE_CAP_ATOMIC_O_TRUNC: filesystem handles the O_TRUNC open flag + */ +#define FUSE_CAP_ATOMIC_O_TRUNC (1 << 3) + + struct fuse_session; struct fuse_chan; ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libfuse update
On 08/26/16 09:52 AM, Jean-Pierre André wrote: What is the need ? AKAIK gvfs is related to Gnome and is not supported on Linux any more. I see the following fuse-related errors, trying to compile gvfs with fuse support error: 'struct fuse_conn_info' has no member named 'want' error: 'FUSE_CAP_ATOMIC_O_TRUNC' undeclared As I see, gvfs is still supported: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gvfs/ -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Southern Federal University IT department ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
