Re: PATCH: sshfs user-side automount

[Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>]

On Tue, 2020-03-17 at 14:00 +0000, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> > > Is the "buflimit" workaround enabled when sshfs(1) is invoked as «sshfs
> > > -o workaround=rename»?  I.e., does defaulting the "rename" workaround
> > > enabled effectively change sshfs(1)'s default behaviour?  
> > My reading of the manual page is you'd need to set "nobuflimit" explicitly
> > to turn it off, else there wouldn't be much use for the "no" prefix,
> > you'd always have to list the ones you want to turn on.  So I think
> > the way it's done is there to fix this exact issue.
> In the alternative semantics, the "no" prefix wouldn't be useless; it'd still
> be useful to allow people to write scripts such as «f() { sshfs -o
> workaround=foo "$@" }» that may be invoked as «f -o workaround=nofoo» to
> disable foo.  However, I agree it's probably implemented as you say.

Yeah, I think that's good enough for our due diligence.  The manual
entry added is explicit about the function's default behaviour and there
is a style you can set.

cheers
pws