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

Userspace FUSE for macOS

fuse-t.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 137 posts

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#121

Post by tambourine_man »

mdaniel wrote: post #63
clhodapp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming that everyone's "prod" is a Linux server. I would say that MacOS needs containers for developing Darwin software.

Yes, I think that's a perfectly reasonable assumption given that (AFAIK) the only current "containerization" (as GP used that word) strategy is on Linux. BSD has jails and Solaris has something similar, but as far as "fire this thing up with its own pid, network, and fs namespacing, and allow me to constrain it easily" that's just Linux. I guess put another way: you run Darwin in production? As for the latter, macOS…

> "containerization" (as GP used that word)

No one used that word

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#122

Post by jbverschoor »

macintux wrote: post #96
jbverschoor wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Api is still socket api.. AF_INET vs AF_UNIX. It takes a few lines of code to have to option to switch between. Ignorance makes sense.. I guess full stack developers means people who can read the top 5 lines of a stack trace

> I guess full stack developers means people who can read the top 5 lines of a stack trace C'mon. Do I really need to quote the guidelines to you?

Oh was not meant as a personal attack or anything. Just general state of the industry

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#123

Post by tambourine_man »

Cyberdog wrote: post #59
tambourine_man wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Installing multiple versions is solved, changing the environment easily, not so much, I think

I'm not sure of the specifics with Homebrew, but with MacPorts, I have both PHP 7.4 and 8.1 running via FPM and serving sites rather trivially. The basics: Install both php74-fpm and php81-fpm, configure the former to put its socket at /var/run/php74-fpm.sock and the latter at /var/run/php81-fpm.sock, configure nginx's domain-specific config files to look for the FastCGI socket that the respective path, use MacPorts…

I edit Apache’s config files and reload it every time, but I’m not pleased with that solution.

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#124

Post by pabs3 »

searealist wrote: post #114
pabs3 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are ephemeral, they hold no data after being closed and backups of them aren't useful. Only the name is needed, therefore a tmpfs is the place to store them.

And if I want to run a daemon as a user where should the socket go?

For example the OpenSSH agent uses this path:

/run/user/$UID/openssh_agent

Several things place sockets there, some other stuff places the socket in a subdirectory.

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#125

Post by lproven »

jbverschoor wrote: post #72
userbinator wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because TCP is well-known and works both locally and over the network, on just about every networked operating system?

It’s not almost enough for all developers to not just simply bind to 0.0.0.0. It’s not well known enough, looking at the recent thread where people are amazed that the i notation is simply a 32bit number van can be used like that. Or even http://0xd1d8e6f0 For example, even if you do vind to localhost, anyone on your system can access your service. Let’s say an electron is running on port 5555. A guest user on your s…

I cannot understand this. It may not just be me. Would you like to try again?

> it's not almost enough... to not

That is not a standard English structure and I can't unwrap all the negatives and follow it.

> i notation

(?)

> van be used like that

(?) "can be"

> vind to localhost

(?) "bind to"

> an electron is running on port

(?)

Re: Userspace FUSE for macOS

#130

Post by sph »

eptcyka wrote: post #129
sph wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never seen the UDS acronym to refer to UNIX sockets. Just call them UNIX sockets.

They're called UNIX domain sockets. Just call them UDS.

On the most popular UNIX-like operating system, Linux, there's are literally zero references to UDS to mean UNIX domain sockets.

  $ sudo mandb
  $ man -K UDS
The point is that acronyms that are not context appropriate and/or very uncommon are quite annoying to come across. I guess it was worth saving a dozen bytes not to write the full thing in the first place.
Post reply on HN