site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-dev@lists.apple.com Ad-hoc operations are not established or standard operating methods. I'm not sure I follow how this relates to FUSE, however. Amanda Walker _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (Darwin-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-dev/site_archiver%40lists.appl... On May 21, 2007, at 8:05 AM, Dan Shoop wrote: Production is about maintaining and running operations according to set service levels using established procedures and methods. That places the two rather at opposites. FUSE is just a well defined API for implementing a file system in a userspace process rather than in the kernel--it is to file systems what pseudoterminals (ptys) are to character devices. If anything, by defining a stable (and OS-independent) API, FUSE is less "ad hoc" than the methods used for implementing userspace file systems in userspace in the past (webdav, the automounter, and so on). Now, this certainly makes it easier to prototype a new file system implementation than writing a kernel VFS plugin is, but that's orthogonal to the quality of any given implementation, which is what matters for whether or not you'd use it in production. And since a defect in the file system module won't cause a kernel panic, one could argue that at any given quality level, a userspace implementation may well be *more* robust than a kernel implementation. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com