Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:
> > There is "per" instead of "re" in the name :-)
> Perhaps "con" would've been more appropriate, given the reactions. :)
You will have to find a meaning for that one!
The confusion was expected, as we now have two high level FUSE API. Here
is a little sketch that may
Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
> > Mention mips64 support (from the first branch merge) by matt@,
> > so details wont be forgotten in the release notes.
>
> IMO, no one will forget it because all mips ports have been broken
> since the merge and we won't get the next release unless it's fixed.
>
> Anyway,
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 03:39:04AM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Matthias Scheler wrote:
> > Can you please explain what is the difference between "libperfuse"
> > and "librefuse" is?
>
> There is "per" instead of "re" in the name :-)
Perhaps "con" would've been more appropriate, given the re
Matthias Scheler wrote:
> Can you please explain what is the difference between "libperfuse" and
> "librefuse" is?
There is "per" instead of "re" in the name :-)
Here is the explanation:
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-userlevel/2010/08/22/msg003843.html
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.fr
On 25 Aug 2010, at 8:16, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Log Message:
> libperfuse(3) is a PUFFS relay to FUSE. In order to use it,
> FUSE filesystem must be patched to #include in the source
> files that open /dev/fuse and perform the mount(2) system call. The
> FUSE filesystem must be linked with -lp
> Mention mips64 support (from the first branch merge) by matt@,
> so details wont be forgotten in the release notes.
IMO, no one will forget it because all mips ports have been broken
since the merge and we won't get the next release unless it's fixed.
Anyway, if you would like to mention it, we
