From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <1535910240.3778367.1494266984.4C7B2E47@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Ethan Gardener To: 9fans@9fans.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2018 18:44:00 +0100 References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [9fans] 9P or better file services for multiple platforms Topicbox-Message-UUID: e028cbc6-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 I had a thought pertaining to the original topic. On Sat, Sep 1, 2018, at 6:21 AM, Lucio De Re wrote: > The question, then, is what file service will satisfy these needs, > including access control, automatic backup as provided by default > under Plan 9, etc. I am not very fond of Linux's propensity to need > daily upgrades, but Plan 9 has quirks of its own, which I would be > hard pressed to enumerate here, but we are all aware of. > > If I could run the file server on a modern (or even an ancient) > version of NetBSD, I'd be even happier as NetBSD is the Unix flavour I > highly favour. But that is a bonus, not an essential. Regarding the automatic backup, FreeBSD's UFS (the default filesystem) provides snapshots much like CWFS's dump. I think you can enable it for the whole filesystem with a mount option, but if not, I think it's quite easy to set up anyway. FreeBSD has ZFS too, which of course offers snapshots, but it has so many options that I found it a bit too much. It seems well documented and the interface seems reasonable for the feature set, but it's a big feature set. I have a habit of trying to understand and use too much at once, I guess.