From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <2A42D5A6-C7C1-4E40-A9B0-4E8F6591E079@bitblocks.com> <009E0199-D15B-4985-8527-F3C14C32F824@bitblocks.com> From: =?UTF-8?B?QXJhbSBIxIN2xINybmVhbnU=?= Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 19:43:49 +0200 Message-ID: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] Upspin - a respin of 9p? Topicbox-Message-UUID: b55e567c-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Charles Forsyth wrote: > What needs to be done to get upspin to work on Windows? Shallow or deep > problem? Well now it implements synthetic filesystems through FUSE, and FUSE is not available on Windows. Even worse, there's no good way of implementing synthetic filesystems in userspace on Windows. In principle you can use upspin without kernel support for mounting synthetic filesystems, just like you can conceivably use 9P without the ability to mount filesystems in the namespace, but the effect of this is unclear. I don't have a good understanding if the usual, desired mode of operation is through the file system or through the protocols directly, via libraries and commands. --=20 Aram H=C4=83v=C4=83rneanu