From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44CA2861.5060104@lanl.gov> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 09:08:17 -0600 From: Ronald G Minnich User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.1.fc4 (X11/20060501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] mount 9P on Linux and FreeBSD via FUSE References: <14ec7b180607262309p68833ccbr2d506a3d127d261@mail.gmail.com> <509071940607270458ta9776datbb0cd9ec60c44dd7@mail.gmail.com> <14ec7b180607270924r431c0a2ue9dc7a7e78931473@mail.gmail.com> <6F64DFDC-F660-44A1-9CD7-D9E4ADD76086@lanl.gov> <20060728092155.GB20048@bio.cse.psu.edu> In-Reply-To: <20060728092155.GB20048@bio.cse.psu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 920a4648-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Scott Schwartz wrote: > Is there enough 9p support in linux 2.6 to do that without fuse? now you're depressing me. Yes, you can do 9p in linux 2.6 without fuse. You just do a mount. I set a lot of mine up in /etc/fstab. Or do you mean user mounts? Maybe I missed something. > Can someone who understands both compare this to v9fs? Fuse is cute, it works, it's fine for the local case. It seems to be pretty solid. A very nice point solution, completely useless for what we do here at LANL. It seems to be easier for people to figure out than 9p servers. Another issue is that to date the 9p server libraries we had were mostly p9p-based, and Linux people prefer not to use p9p libraries to write software, I'm finding. Nothing wrong with p9p libraries, people just don't want to deal with them. Lucho has developed native Unix libraries which are pretty nice, and we're moving our software over to those. thanks ron