Re: Fuse
Re: Fuse
- Subject: Re: Fuse
- From: Mo McRoberts <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 13:29:16 +0100
On 21-May-2007, at 13:05, Dan Shoop wrote:
At 11:14 PM +0200 5/18/07, Uli Kusterer wrote:
On 16.05.2007, at 19:44, Dan Shoop wrote:
It's further clear that ad-hoc filesystems are anathema to
production.
O RLY? Elaborate :-)
Production is about maintaining and running operations according to
set service levels using established procedures and methods.
Ad-hoc operations are not established or standard operating methods.
There is a clear and somewhat blatantly obvious difference between a
person performing actions on an ad-hoc basis and an operating system
making provision for so-called “ad-hoc” extensions to a system. FUSE
filesystems are only called “ad-hoc” in this scenario because they
don't ship as part of the operating system, but that doesn't in any
way preclude them from being built, tested and operated in a
controlled fashion in a production environment according to set
service levels using established procedures and methods!
ALL user-provided pieces of software, including kernel extensions,
are loaded in an “ad-hoc” fashion. It's a rather defining
characteristic of modern desktop and server operating systems. If you
want a system that doesn't provide this ability, you'll be wanting an
embedded system.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >Fuse (From: Andre-John Mas <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Dan Shoop <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Filipe Cabecinhas <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Dan Shoop <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Uli Kusterer <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Dan Shoop <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Uli Kusterer <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: Fuse (From: Dan Shoop <email@hidden>) |