On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:44:44PM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > co...@sdf.org writes: > > > If anything we should get rid of perfuse. > > Certainly not. It is there because gluster uses /dev/fuse directly, or > via some "low level" API, rather than using the standard FUSE API (the > "high level" API). I am unclear on why, but my impression is that there > are good reasons vs it being gratuitous. So perfuse - which is only in > pkgsrc - has to stay. > > But, that's not really related to the best way forward here. > > Is it a fair characterization that what you are proposing is about > adding support for older versions of the API, to accomodate programs > that are not written to the current FUSE API version? > > Other than a bit more header defs, and a few compat functions, are there > downsides? > > Is this notion of compat APIs normal in FUSE? With real modern fuse, > are the old API functions available always, or does one have to define > something?
No, upstream FUSE loves having every downstream filesystem get adjusted whenever it decides an argument isn't useful any more.
