Hi,
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> There's a slight problem with filesystem type representation in fuse
> based filesystems.
>
> >From the kernel's view, there are just two filesystem types: fuse and
> fuseblk. From the user's view there are lots of different filesystem
> types. The user is not even much concerned if the filesystem is fuse
> based or not.
Yes. Those who are concerned with the fstype and mount like
mount -t fstype device mountpoint
apparently expect mount/fstab line like
device mountpoint fstype ...
Of course the fstype could be fuse.subtype or fuseblk.subtype but that
would add a needless complexity (also, for example ntfs-3g uses both and
it decides run-time which one to use).
> So there's a conflict of interest in how this should be
> represented in fstab, mtab and /proc/mounts.
>
> The current scheme is to encode the real filesystem type in the mount
> source. So an sshfs mount looks like this:
>
> sshfs#user@server:/ /mnt/server fuse rw,nosuid,nodev,...
>
> This url-ish syntax works OK for sshfs and similar filesystems.
> However for block device based filesystems (ntfs-3g, zfs) it doesn't
> work, since the kernel expects the mount source to be a real device
> name.
>
> A possibly better scheme would be to encode the real type in the type
> field as "type.subtype". So fuse mounts would look like this:
>
> /dev/hda1 /mnt/windows fuseblk.ntfs-3g rw,...
> user@server:/ /mnt/server fuse.sshfs rw,nosuid,nodev,...
I think it's definitely an improvement because it solves real problems,
though perhaps not the way users would expect.
Szaka
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
