[TxMt] Remote filesystems (was: Remote projects)

[Chris Thomas]

On Sep 23, 2005, at 5:19 PM, Gerd Knops wrote:

>
> On Fri, Sep 23, at 3:28 PM, Kevin Ballard wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 23, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Gerd Knops wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> [5] http://developer.apple.com/qa/qa2001/qa1242.html
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Erm, I'd like to point out that, as [5] mentions, in Tiger VFS's  
>> are now fairly well insulated from Kernel changes, and if I  
>> remember WWDC correctly, the Kernel changes in 10.4 should make  
>> things like VFS's a lot more forward-compatible. So it really  
>> isn't so much the moving target anymore.
>>
>
> True, and a kernel-level interface to something like Fuse would be  
> the more efficient and elegant solution. Though considering their  
> comments about stacking VFS plug-ins in that same document shows  
> that they do tend to change their minds.

They've been pretty consistent on this, actually. Remember, that was  
over four years ago. Ever since, they've been warning developers that  
the VFS interface would change in the future. They inherited the VFS  
architecture from BSD, remember, they didn't create it. The stacking  
stuff came "for free". Tiger is the first time they've made a  
commitment to VFS binary compatibility.

> Also binary compatibility for kexts between OS releases is very  
> hard to maintain, and the fact remains that documentation is poor  
> and kernel-level development is quite the black magic. NFS on the  
> other hand is pretty well understood and they will think twice  
> about dropping NFS support. But all this is philosophical until  
> someone actually sits down and does something about this...

Probably someone with either corporate support or a ton of free time  
will have to sit down and dive through the WebDAV FS code to figure  
out how to build a FuseFS equivalent.

Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macromates.com/textmate/attachments/20050925/046b1985/attachment.html>