From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <24e5acab674ffd8cc2ff5d460b6ad552@terzarima.net>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] fuse bashing
From: Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 08:37:27 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20060124022214.GD26367@ionkov.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e59baf14-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> It is much simpler (and probably faster), and that's a big win for FUSE:

given that it evades some problems (particularly in the kernel interface
wrt messed-up cache schemes, and being able to interrupt things, and
a few other things i noticed in my own survey last year, not to mention
portability), i'm not at all surprised fuse is currently smaller.