Re: cygfuse

[Mark Geisert <mark at maxrnd dot com>]

On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Bill Zissimopoulos wrote:
> On 9/8/16, 1:03 AM, Mark Geisert wrote:
> > I've changed Subject: to reflect what's being discussed now.  When we
> > have a
> > consensus cygfuse I'll issue an ITP for it.
> >
> > I've now updated the cygfuse repository on GitHub so it is more neutral
> > about
> > FUSE implementations.  It can be seen at
> > https://github.com/mgeisert/cygfuse .
> >
> > I've also read up a little on Dokan and Dokany, so I should be able to
> > better
> > respond to any comments Adrien might have about the updated cygfuse.
>
> Mark, has there been any additional progress on this?

No activity. I was not expecting Dokany to be fully integrated before 
ITPing cygfuse, but I had hoped to hear at least that the layout of FUSE 
include files works for them (or doesn't) and that the strategy of dynamic 
loading Dokany's DLL is workable for them too.

> Looking at the updated cygfuse I believe one change would be to rename
> cygfuse.pc back to fuse.pc so that build configuration scripts can find
> it. I have created a github issue for this.

I've now made those changes and updated the GitHub issue. Should the URL 
named in fuse.pc.in now point at the GitHub cygfuse project?

> Other than that I would think that the package would be ready for
> submission. Any changes to support additional projects like Dokany, etc.
> could easily happen in the future when those projects are ready.

Agreed. It would be neet though to find out sooner rather than later 
whether some other FUSE implementation can coexist with WinFSP. I don't 
have the bandwidth to check Dokany or any others myself despite interest.

..mark