Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

colatkinson.site

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 407 posts

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#151

Post by roenxi »

DagAgren wrote: post #139
pjc50 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the developers generally understand that. No sensible person goes into FOSS for the money. It's the customers - consuming non-developers - who have a problem of expectations.

But every person, sensible or not, has bills to pay. When you say "no sensible person goes into FOSS for the money" you are saying "most people can't afford to actively maintain a FOSS project", and you really can't claim that is in any way good for FOSS.

That doesn't sound like much of a change from the last 30 years. FOSS has done fine so far.

Really the only thing that might work is if there was broad community acceptance of not changing all the lower parts of the software stack all the time so the maintenance burden is lower.

Honestly; if we were interested in what was good for FOSS all that needs to happen is that hardware stops improving all the time. Then everyone can calm down, declare things finished and move on without requirements changing. The Linux graphic system (c.f. Xorg v. Wayland) still hasn't finished adjusting to graphics cards. That sort of change is bad for FOSS.

In a sense, this sort of thing is what is being showcased here. The breaking changes to FUSE are probably going to be linked to design changes in Catalina triggered by RAM/CPU/Network changes and the RPM/SSD transition that has been going on for however long. When that sort of thing subsides in 50 years there is going to be this amazing FOSS renaissance as working things stop breaking because of hardware changes and the balance really tilts towards free & available software.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#152

Post by gdfasfklshg4 »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #130
rahuldottech wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. I'm sorry if I make it sound like that, definitely not my intention. I recognize that there's a serious lack of volunteers and contributors in the FOSS ecosystem. 2. When it comes to FOSS encryption software, it is important that it's audited every-so-often. Relying on closed-source frameworks makes that impossible. All FOSS software may not be scrutinized, but it's a definite advantage that it can be, when the ne…

Has FUSE for macos ever been audited?

Not publicly[1] but it could be on given day. Closed source code can't be.

[1] Google presumably audited it when they used a fork.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#153

Post by steeleduncan »

saagarjha wrote: post #128
captn3m0 wrote: post #76

I had a project planned for iOS[0] that would have been so much better if it could use FUSE, but looks like it can't happen now. If someone wants to try, having a generic link between FUSE and File Providers in iOS will be a great addition. You could make a generic application that interoperates various FUSE projects against the File Provider API in iOS, so you could mount all sort of crazy stuff in iOS Files applica…

MacFUSE requires deep hooks into the kernel to work correctly. Do you think the File Provider API is sufficient for this purpose?

It's API is not very clear, but it does seem to have roughly equivalent functionality to FUSE. The only obvious restriction is that there must be a physical file on disk rather than doing everything in-memory.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#154

Post by laughinghan »

pjmlp wrote: post #98
f1refly wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a lie, lots of people donate voluntarily for their favorite free software every day. If you decide to be a leech that's fine too, but don't try to convince yourself others are that way as well.

Donations don't allow for a sustainable business.

But they demonstrably can allow for a sustainable project, the obvious example being the Linux Foundation.

And if you admit to the existence of donations, then do you admit that you were wrong to say "open source folks don't want to pay for anything"?

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#155

Post by tonyedgecombe »

gdfasfklshg4 wrote: post #152
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has FUSE for macos ever been audited?

Not publicly[1] but it could be on given day. Closed source code can't be. [1] Google presumably audited it when they used a fork.

So probably not then.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#156

Post by tinus_hn »

hapless wrote: post #65

The heart of the matter is that a fairly small number of people on a proprietary UNIX are mad that they have to pay money to continue to be free riders on the Free Software movement. Mr Fleischer has done a huge amount of unpaid work so a narrow segment of wealthy software workers can avoid the choice between paying for proprietary software and supporting Free Software, after spending thousands of dollars on a MacOS…

How is the software ‘Free’ if that freedom depends on your choice of OS or hardware? Free software is allowed to be used by anyone for any purpose.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#157

Post by tinus_hn »

hizanberg wrote: post #42
rahuldottech wrote: post #15

IIRC, FUSE is also required for VeraCrypt to function. So now the source code of this library (module? whatever) that's used by popular encryption software won't be available for public scrutiny. Amazing. The author is, of course, completely within their rights to stop publishing the source code of their software, but this is a real pity. The way to go would be for members of the FOSS community to fork the last versi…

You make it sound like there's a tonne of FOSS community on-hand just waiting for the chance to step in and create a popular fork that will lead to fragmentation, when he's effectively been the sole maintainer since 2012 [1]. It's far more likely there will no future well maintained OSS forks, he'll continue developing it as a closed-source product, allowing end-users to install it for free but any company who wants…

As the article notes this is pretty unlikely because distributing .kexts require Apple certification.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#158

Post by dspillett »

jacobush wrote: post #91
deng wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's why I prefer the GPL This is a pretty common misunderstanding. Google is using oxfuse internally and does not distribute it, so the GPL would not change anything here.

Unless it was GPLv3 he liked.

Or AGPL.

Though as gdrive does have locally installed components, if those used code covered by standard GPL they at least would be covered even if the server-side components were considered separate enough that they would not.

Re: FUSE for macOS is no longer open source

#159

Post by tinus_hn »

adrianN wrote: post #127
pilif wrote: post #116

Nitpick: > Now this may come as a shock to some of you, but Apple really doesn’t seem to like it when third party developers change just about anything about their UX > Deploying a kext requires it be signed using a special Kernel Extension Signing Certificate, which can only be acquired from Apple this restriction has nothing to do with them not liking people doing stuff about their UX and everything to do about the…

Forbidding users from doing dangerous stuff with the machines they own is not good imho.

But is it allowed for users to choose a machine that forbids this?
Post reply on HN