Comments on: Gnome virtual filesystem support in applications…

By: Rory MCCann

Rory MCCann — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:24:25 +0000

sshfs is no long linux specific. It has been ported to Mac OSX and FreeBSD.

All this gnome-vfs should be removed and replaced with FUSE IMO

By: John

John — Wed, 15 Feb 2006 08:30:50 +0000

I recently started using sshfs with fuse to overcome this problem. With a bit of tweaking, it’s superb. Totally stable. I now have total access to several boxes via nautilus or any local program. Brilliant stuff!

If you do decide to try it out, make sure you get the most recent version from the site, the most current version from the fedora repo was too buggy to use. Other than that, very good. Make sure you avoid shfs though (note only one s) as I’ve found this to be very unstable (crashes a lot on unmounting).

By: loans

loans — Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:31:24 +0000

loans

Take your time to take a look at some relevant pages in the field of loans mortgage rates

By: Cliff

Cliff — Wed, 03 Aug 2005 09:55:27 +0000

Tuomas,

Ironically, Comcast had a small outage tonight and I temporarily lost Internet for a short while. I had several sshfs filesystems mounted (and was in fact accessing one of them when this occurred. The whole system pretty much came to a standstill, much as if I had really lost a disk (I’ve seen similar effects when an IDE drive failed on me).

I didn’t get a chance to see what would have happened had I waited because I ended up rebooting.

I’m wondering how difficult it would have been for FUSE/sshfs to have broken out of this and returned an error rather than just hanging waiting for I/O to complete.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Thu, 28 Jul 2005 03:55:29 +0000

I’m using FUSE and sshfs and they work great (but as others noted, Linux only). However, the problem is the reverse of gnome-vfs: all my apps *except* Nautilus work fine. Nautilus can see the files, but since it sees that they are not owned by the user who is browsing it (they have the UID and GID of the user on the remote host), it refuses to let the user change them. I was looking for a solution to this when I came across this blog entry.

By: Sven

Sven — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:14:23 +0000

why ca we not just mount the gnome-vfs things into the normal file-system. But, why is there gnome-vfs then.

hmm, shouldnt the kernel have a function like a “fluffy”-mountoption – so anyone can mount things where there’s a good chance that it could disappear at any time. Strategy could be to handel a security cache for the files and a very straight write-through.

By: michel v

michel v — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 09:43:24 +0000

In the meanwhile, it would be very nice to have apps distinguish remote resources mounted as local directories. Whoever else experienced the pain of browsing an sshfs mounted directory full of images with Nautilus will understand the need for such a distinction (even based on heuristics) to be made.
It could be done by checking /etc/mtab and simply disabling the View Thumbnails option for such directories.

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 20:16:25 +0000

Of course, shfs is just SSH, so can’t be compared to gnome-vfs (even though it rocks). Fuse however looks very cool.

By: AdamW

AdamW — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 20:10:11 +0000

As someone else mentioned, there’s several ways to do it on Linux – that I know of, there’s lufs , fuse-sshfs , and the shfs kernel module. I’m currently using fuse-sshfs. Install fuse and fuse-sshfs, then it’s as simple as:

modprobe fuse
sshfs hostname:/directory /path/to/mountpoint

lufs is about the same but seems to be a little slower and buggier, shfs needs to be suid to be really usable so I don’t like that.

By: Raphael Bosshard (rboss)

Raphael Bosshard (rboss) — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:45:38 +0000

Yes, it sucks. And it blows. And.. whatever.

The Problem is, that gnome-vfs is a problem itself. It’s to complicated, to overblown. Instead of serving as a simplification layer (easy the pain of connecting to different abstract file systems) it creates a whole bunch of problems.

Hopefully that will change! The gnome-vfs maintainers promised to create a new, document oriented API (load file, save file, move file, all those convenient functions). But when…?

So forcing people to adopt gnome-vfs is the wrong way, though I see your point. It’s a bitch.