[Gluster-devel] RFC: FUSE kernel features to be adopted by GlusterFS
jeff at pl.atyp.us
Thu Nov 9 23:01:10 UTC 2017
> So - nothing inherent to libfuse and nothing that would be relevant as
> of today.
> But then, let me put it like this: what reason could we have to *not* go
> with xglfs in 4.0? It's true that the deliverables are present in libfuse
> libgfapi and it's just a thin glue. As such it seems to be almost devoid
> of design concerns, it just bridges the two interfaces in a
> straightforward manner. Superficially it seems to be a superior approach
> - what snag holds us back to embrace it wholeheartedly?
What about https://review.gluster.org/#/c/3341/ and its antecedents?
Libfuse used to be unable to deal with SELinux's behavior of trying to
issue a getxattr from within the mount call. Have either libfuse or
SELinux fixed that? There might be other local changes that we'd need
to verify in similar fashion.
More information about the Gluster-devel