Re: [rox-devel] Re: [rox-users] Changing the Menu

[Jonatan L. <th...@ho...>]

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:06:46 +0000
Thomas Leonard <ta...@ec...> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 12:05:10AM -0300, Jonatan Liljedahl wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:49:43 -0300
> > Jonatan Liljedahl <th...@ho...> wrote:
> > 
> > >  On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 08:36:57 -0700
> > >  Kurt B Cox <kur...@gm...> wrote:
> > > 
> > >  > How does one tinker with the source tree to change the menu
> > >  > items, say
> > >  >  removing AVFS for example?
> > > 
> > >  I think it should be a good idea to remove the AVFS item anyhow!
> > > 
> > >  * AVFS is buggy
> > >  * AVFS is old and abandoned, last release date was 2002!
> > >  * If you want a simple way to open a file in AVFS you could
> > >  simple add a script to sendto:
> > > 
> > >  #!/bin/sh
> > >  cd "$1"/#
> > > 
> > >  Or, if you don't want to install the buggy redir module:
> > > 
> > >  #!/bin/sh
> > >  cd /overlay/"$1"
> > 
> > BTW, shouldn't we use gnome-vfs or maybe FUSE for this instead?
> > A good thing with gnome-vfs is that you won't need to mount stuff.
> > But a good thing with FUSE is that it enables all apps to work
> > inside the virtual filesystem, for example opening a README inside a
> > tarball with Edit.
> 
> See also:
> 
> 	http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/dvfs

Interresting. But isn't it better with a system-wide VFS that all apps
can access? It would be bad if you had to rewrite all apps and utils
that should be able to access stuff in VFS... For example, say you're
roxing inside a remote CIFS share and want to open a textfile in your
editor, then the editor too must use the dvfs API... With a solution
like FUSE+AVFS (I'm running this right now, from AVFS cvs) you know that
ALL apps on your system can access the VFS just as it were on the local
disc. I think this is the right way, and the most unix way where
"everything is a file"... (What if all apps that wanted to access a
mounted disc would have to use a special API? it would be mad..)

PS. Thomas, why not use FUSE for zeroinstall? it should work excellent
and you could let go of maintaining a kernel filesystem module... =)

/Jonatan    -=( http://kymatica.com )=-