On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 09:31:20PM -0500, Brett Gilio wrote: > Hi all, > > With 1.0 around the corner, is there any priority for packages like > fuse? The latest release is 3.5 and we are using 2.9. > > All of these packages depend on it > casync@2 multipath-tools@0.7.9 fio@3.13 python-llfuse@0.41.1 > python-fusepy@2.0.4 python2-gdrivefs@0.14.9 python2-llfuse@1.3.5 > borg@1.1.9 skopeo@0.1.28 flatpak@1.2.4 unionfs-fuse@2.0 fuseiso@20070708 > fuse-exfat@1.3.0 archivemount@0.8.12 sshfs@2.10 testdisk@7.0 ifuse@1.1.3 > spacefm@1.0.6 caja-extensions@1.22.0 mate@1.22.0 lxde@0.99.2 > gnome-tweak-tool@3.26.4 gnome@3.24.3 httpfs2@0.1.5 curlftpfs@0.9.2 > disorderfs@0.5.6 apfs-fuse@0.0.0-0.c7036a3 encfs@1.9.5 sra-tools@2.9.3 > wimlib@1.13.0 > > Is it maybe lingering in one of our unmerged branches out there? If not, > I wouldn't mind trying to take a crack at bumping it. I know for a fact > that not updating it limits out ability to upgrade sshfs since it > depends on version >3. > > Best > > Brett Gilio >
I looked into bumping it a while ago and I ended up down a rabbit hole I didn't really want to venture into. Don't really remember much beyond that unfortunately. I looked into bumping it a while ago and I ended up down a rabbit hole I didn't really want to venture into. Don't really remember much beyond that unfortunately. -- Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> אפרים פלשנר GPG key = A28B F40C 3E55 1372 662D 14F7 41AA E7DC CA3D 8351 Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed on emails sent or received unencrypted
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
