test forks of MacFUSE for use with sshfs on OS X Lion #1495
Labels
No Label
0.2.0
0.3.0
0.4.0
0.5.0
0.5.1
0.6.0
0.6.1
0.7.0
0.8.0
0.9.0
1.0.0
1.1.0
1.10.0
1.10.1
1.10.2
1.10a2
1.11.0
1.12.0
1.12.1
1.13.0
1.14.0
1.15.0
1.15.1
1.2.0
1.3.0
1.4.1
1.5.0
1.6.0
1.6.1
1.7.0
1.7.1
1.7β
1.8.0
1.8.1
1.8.2
1.8.3
1.8β
1.9.0
1.9.0-s3branch
1.9.0a1
1.9.0a2
1.9.0b1
1.9.1
1.9.2
1.9.2a1
LeastAuthority.com automation
blocker
cannot reproduce
cloud-branch
code
code-dirnodes
code-encoding
code-frontend
code-frontend-cli
code-frontend-ftp-sftp
code-frontend-magic-folder
code-frontend-web
code-mutable
code-network
code-nodeadmin
code-peerselection
code-storage
contrib
critical
defect
dev-infrastructure
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
fixed
invalid
major
minor
n/a
normal
operational
packaging
somebody else's problem
supercritical
task
trivial
unknown
was already fixed
website
wontfix
worksforme
No Milestone
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Reference: tahoe-lafs/trac-2024-07-25#1495
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s(<nil>)"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
MacFUSE has apparently splintered into three or four forks, none of which work properly with Tahoe on OS X 10.7 (Lion). See wiki/SftpFrontend#sshfsonMacOSX for details.
This ticket can be closed when we are able to access a Tahoe filesystem reliably over sshfs on Lion, and have documented how to do that.
Attachment sshfs-debug-output.txt (12407 bytes) added
output of sshfs with -o sshfs_debug, using the Tuxera 2.2.1 fork of MacFUSE. At the end, the sshfs process exits unexpectedly and the filesystem is unmounted.
tarcieri, what was the exact sshfs command line for attachment:sshfs-debug-output.txt?
According to https://trac.macports.org/ticket/29917#comment:48, FUSE4X has already fixed the stability bugs with sshfs and with 64-bit kernels. Also, FUSE4X is forked from a more recent version of Linux FUSE then OSXFUSE, and seems to intend to stay closer to upstream in future (this is supported by the revision histories so far). OSXFUSE seems to have a lone developer (Benjamin Fleischer); although FUSE4X also has one primary developer (Anatol Pomozov), he appears to have more help. OSXFUSE does have the technical advantage of working with existing binaries of filesystems compiled for MacFUSE, but that is liable to cause as many problems as it solves. I'm betting on FUSE4X.
Glyph Lefkowitz recommends FUSE4X.
(wiki/SftpFrontend) was updated to reflect that FUSE4X seems to work: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/SftpFrontend?action=diff&version=77&old_version=75
What more, if anything, do we need to close this ticket?
http://fuse4x.github.io/ currently says: "Fuse4X has been merged to OSXFUSE project. Consider switching to OSXFUSE for a new development."
So we need to test OSXFUSE (a.k.a. FUSE for OS X), and then update wiki/SftpFrontend to recommend that if it works.
See also https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/fuse4x/Pi55U_K4HgU.