OpenBSD Journal

g2k16 Hackathon Report: Martin Natano on fuse, NTFS and more

Contributed by rueda on from the fuse the mount dept.

Next up in our series of g2k16 hackathon reports is this one from Martin Natano:

I arrived at the g2k16 hackathon with the expectation of working on fusefs and indeed on the first day I've committed a diff to clean up the attribute handling in the kernel and libfuse. Next on my list was a bug that manifested itself by fuse mount points becoming unusable after heavy usage of another mount point. Doh! I came up with a diff to fix it. (Reviews welcome!) That fixed, I joined a group of hackers for beer and proper burgers.

Back in the hackroom the next day I started ripping out write support from our NTFS implementation. It has been previously disabled due to issues, so there was no way to actually use it. Some space had to be garbage collected for clang. :)

The remaining time of the hackathon I was busy with something I didn't plan for. It wasn't even on my todo list. Theo approached me with the idea of implementing a new mount flag in order to reduce the requirement of superuser privileges during the release process. We discussed some details, then I fired up my editor and started hacking. Enthusiasm has emerged! I managed to pack my work into a diff for internal circulation; watch out for changes in sys_mount() and the build infrastructure.

It was an interesting experience to finally meet all the people I've collaborated with already. Thanks to the organizers and to everyone who found the patience to answer my questions.

Thanks for the report and work, Martin!

(Comments are closed)


  1. By Anonymous Coward (193.43.241.216) on

    Cool, but instead of keeping in base read-only NTFS driver it would be more useful to have robust SMB R/W driver.

    1. By Martin Natano (natano) on https://www.natano.net/

      A volunteer! Where's your diff?

      Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.

      1. By Anonymous Coward (193.43.241.216) on

        > A volunteer! Where's your diff?
        >
        > Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.

        Typical answer from OpenBSD camp...
        I'm sysadmin/end-user, not programmer, sorry.

        Usmb seems to be dead project and it is compatible up to Samba 3.4.

        1. By Chris Cappuccio (chriscappuccio) on http://www.nmedia.net/chris/

          > > A volunteer! Where's your diff?
          > >
          > > Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.
          >
          > Typical answer from OpenBSD camp...
          > I'm sysadmin/end-user, not programmer, sorry.
          >
          > Usmb seems to be dead project and it is compatible up to Samba 3.4.

          If you already know the answer, why ask the question?

          At this rate, you obviously aren't going to convince or influence people to start writing it for you.

          1. By Anonymous Coward (91.241.33.66) on

            > > > A volunteer! Where's your diff?
            > > >
            > > > Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.
            > >
            > > Typical answer from OpenBSD camp...
            > > I'm sysadmin/end-user, not programmer, sorry.
            > >
            > > Usmb seems to be dead project and it is compatible up to Samba 3.4.
            >
            > If you already know the answer, why ask the question?
            >
            > At this rate, you obviously aren't going to convince or influence people to start writing it for you.
            >

            You probably didn't understand me.
            It wasn't request but suggestion that for many people (i think) more useful will be mounting SMB shares out-of-the-box (with tool in base like in FreeBSD or NetBSD) than half-baked (read-only) NTFS driver, where in ports is actively developed full read-write NTFS driver (NTFS-3G).
            But this is _my_humble_opinion_...

            And I don't understand why OpenBSD folks always takes suggestions as requests and throw text like "show us your diff"?

            1. By Jase White (202.49.134.18) on

              > > > > A volunteer! Where's your diff?
              > > > >
              > > > > Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.
              > > >
              > > > Typical answer from OpenBSD camp...
              > > > I'm sysadmin/end-user, not programmer, sorry.
              > > >
              > > > Usmb seems to be dead project and it is compatible up to Samba 3.4.
              > >
              > > If you already know the answer, why ask the question?
              > >
              > > At this rate, you obviously aren't going to convince or influence people to start writing it for you.
              > >
              >
              > You probably didn't understand me.
              > It wasn't request but suggestion that for many people (i think) more useful will be mounting SMB shares out-of-the-box (with tool in base like in FreeBSD or NetBSD) than half-baked (read-only) NTFS driver, where in ports is actively developed full read-write NTFS driver (NTFS-3G).
              > But this is _my_humble_opinion_...
              >
              > And I don't understand why OpenBSD folks always takes suggestions as requests and throw text like "show us your diff"?

              It's not just the 'OpenBSD camp' that will ask you to "show us your diff?" - this is a FOSS project, you want something done that isn't actively being worked on, then you need to take the initiative to either do it yourself or pay/convince someone to do it for you.

              These guys have every right to ask you to show your diff.

              I'm also a sysadmin/end-user and don't actively code. However, just because I want to see a particular part of the codebase worked on over something else, doesn't mean that I have the right to suggest that someone volunteering their time focus on that instead of _what_motivates_them_. Remember that most developers contributing to OpenBSD (and other FOSS projects) are not paid to do so.

        2. By Anonymous Coward (184.151.114.68) on

          > > A volunteer! Where's your diff?
          > >
          > > Ranting aside, there is usmb in ports. I suggest you try that.
          >
          > Typical answer from OpenBSD camp...
          > I'm sysadmin/end-user, not programmer, sorry.
          >
          > Usmb seems to be dead project and it is compatible up to Samba 3.4.

          Well you were suggesting natano drop everything and write code for you. That is how it reads

          Maybe you can pay someone to fullfill your wishes

          Sorry for spelling out what your typical question sounds like

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]