Re: [fuse-devel] go-fuse differences with fuse.h

[Han-Wen N. <ha...@gm...>]

[+list]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Jay Booth <jay...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi, I noticed that your go-fuse package, in the RawFileSystem interface, has
> a few differences with the fuse.h fuse_operations.  It seems for several
> operations (getAttr for one), you're not taking a path and instead looking
> up iNodes based on the raw.InHeader.NodeId.  This seems to be the case in a
> few other places.  In fuse.h, however, every operation supplies a file path
> and I don't even see .
>
> I'm working on a networked filesystem where I want the kernel's idea of
> inodes to be completely divorced from mine, and I'd like the kernel to talk
> to my filesystem primarily around the idea of file names, while I'll work
> out the versioning and the data on my end of it.  So I'm going to throw
> together an alternate RawFileSystem that provides filenames for every
> function call, like the functions in fuse.h.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1)  Am I crazy?  Should I be working by passing inodes back and forth to the
> kernel rather than wanting to work with filenames?

See https://github.com/hanwen/go-fuse/blob/master/fuse/api.go#L80

That said, if possible you should avoid this, and use NodeFileSystem instead.
https://github.com/hanwen/go-fuse/blob/master/fuse/api.go#L15 ; it is
hard to get posix semantics right with path based filenames.

I wonder how you managed to only see RawFileSystem; where did you
start looking for examples/documentation?

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - ha...@xs... - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen