Loading Profile...
Instead of NFS, why not use FUSE on linux?
I was wondering, why use NFS for the linux version, when you could just use FUSE.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/fuse-j has java bindings for FUSE that seem to work. Using FUSE should allow filesystem integration to work with fewer gotchas and root tweaks.
http://sourceforge.net/projects/fuse-j has java bindings for FUSE that seem to work. Using FUSE should allow filesystem integration to work with fewer gotchas and root tweaks.
9 people have this question
I have this question, too!
Tell me when someone answers.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
-
Inappropriate?I agree that FUSE would be the better solution than NFS for wuala, but NFS is just much more common than FUSE. How many people have NFS support compiled in and it's ready-to-use? And how many have a FUSE-enabled kernel? I think offering both ways is a good idea, but I definitely expect FUSE in the future. Give them time.
1 person says
this answers the question
5 Comments Add a comment
This answers the question
-
I don't think nfs is more common. If someone has nfs installed on his home-computer, half of the time there is probably an nfs-server too, and then wuala doesn't mount either. fuse ist stable, fuse runs under windows, there is a java-binding for fuse (FUSE-J) fuse is in every 2.6.X kernel, use fuse! nfs is old and you don't want networking, you want a Filesystem supplied by a USErspace application. ;) (please?) -
Please give me a link to a FUSE implementation for Windows...
-
http://www.suchwerk.net/sodcms_FUSE_for_WINDOWS.htm is listed on fuse.sf.net, but i have to admit, this looks not like something the wuala crew would want to use. The alternative would be to implement the fuse thing for unices and nfs for windows, which wouldn't be so nice either, because of two source trees to maintain. Let's see what you make of it ;)
-
Something I'd like to see is a straightforward SMB-to-FUSE translation layer; this would probably do fairly well for Wuala, but would also be useful for all FUSE-based applications. But I'm not sure if there are "impedance mismatches" between the SMB protocol and FUSE API that would complicate this. It would probably also be significantly easier to do, because it does not require any Windows kernel programming. But oh well, I'm just day dreaming.
-
@ mokrates: Well I found this one too a while ago but it works similar to Wuala, it creates a network share for your filesystems and tries to mount FUSE systems there... If you want to use a filesystem then you have to code something for yourself in C# to get it working - not really a good idea for a typical Windows user and this would just outsource the filesystem integreation problems to "SUCHWERK". A true FUSE port for Windows would be something great and maybe Caleido could do this too but I think they are more concerned about Wuala + the beta... maybe Wuala 1.1 can have FUSE support on all platforms instead of that buggy 3rd party library they are currently using...
-
Inappropriate?FUSE has been around for quite a while and I'd expect any distro release during the last two years to have it. There is also FUSE implementation available for Mac OS X and it looks like a windows version exists too.
NFS-server approach has some problems if you were already running nfs-server. Luckily I no longer needed it so I could turn it off. I didn't manage to get wuala's NFS share mounted without shutting down the original.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
