On 2008.03.19 02:43:27 -0400, "Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH"
On Mar 19, 2008, at 2:12 , Austin Seipp wrote:
Excerpts from Will Thompson's message of Sun Mar 16 08:37:00 -0500 2008:
Currently the module's name is HFuse. Presumably it really belongs under System somewhere; System.Posix.Fuse maybe? What do folks think? Are there any guidelines for picking a namespace?
I don't think there's any sort of doc on picking a namespace or how to logically name your package modules (would likely be worth writing); for something like this, I would say something under System.Posix.* would be the most appropriate.
Erm, "POSIX" does not mean "Linux and sufficiently similar systems". FUSE is supported by open source Unixlikes, not by POSIX compliant systems in general.
-- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allbery@kf8nh.com
Not sure that's a useful distinction to make. Wikipedia says "FUSE is available for Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD (as PUFFS), OpenSolaris and Mac OS X (as MacFUSE)." Linux, the BSDs, and Solaris are all pretty POSIX compliant, where they have not actually been officially certified by POSIX; OS X Leopard is surprisingly enough, certified - http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/unix.html says "Leopard is an Open Brand UNIX 03 Registered Product, conforming to the SUSv3 and POSIX 1003.1 specifications for the C API, Shell Utilities, and Threads. Since Leopard can compile and run all your existing UNIX code, you can deploy it in environments that demand full conformance — complete with hooks to maintain compatibility with existing software." Since there's no Filesystem.* hierarchy, what's wrong with System.Posix.FUSE.*? I know of no non-Posix systems that run FUSE... -- gwern enigma main Warfare DREC Intiso cards kilderkin Crypto Waihopai Oscor