Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
I use both of these systems daily. They have some issues but are just fine for me. Honestly, they are just opposite extremes and I repeat that. They each chose a side.
Whereas windows makes me scream. Itβs absolute horseshit that pretends to claim some middle ground that makes no one happy.
The post refers SSHFS which is based upon FUSE, a very neat technology in the Linux kernel which allows a non-kernel develloper - says a python developer-to turn anything into a hierarchy of files and folders, that you can access and modify with your regular local applications. When I says anything, I'm dead serious, FUSE may turn the whole internet into a fake browsable tree of local files on your system. On windows, you have to write a fake disk driver to mimic a fraction of the feature. I don't know ios but I guess Apple wouldn't never allow such a wizardry by design.
Only tangentially related, since I don't think NBD uses FUSE, but may I present Harder Drive
yeah!!!
There is a mac os port of fuse that works fine on intel macs, but requires a mighty amount of twiddling on apple silicon macs
Wouldn't you just use AFS, CEPH, NFS, or 9p?
I really don't want to be that guy, but isn't SSHFS (FUSE) actually a terrible option when compared to an actual file-system? MacOS isn't really missing out on much there.
The most painful part of MacOS (which makes it downright unbearable for me) is that system configuration files are XML. It's an absolute nightmare.
SSHFS uses SFTP which is built into SSH, so no server to install. Its not as fast as NFS, but requires no setup. For something small like a home lab, that is a big advantage.
This. Surely not the fastest way to get content from/to a remote computer, but it just works as soon as you enable sshd.
SSHFS is very mature. I use it for administering several home servers.
It works so well that they added a mode where some users can have SFTP only access (without SSH shell) so you can set up shared directories. It was easier to set up (for me) than CIFS or NFS.
SSHFS is secure and works well over the internet. If you only want to access it over the LAN, then NFS is a much better option.
I have this problem with Android. Google has turned the filesystem into unusable garbage, so you're lucky, if you can launch a gallery app with a file path and it allows you to actually go through the images in that folder.
And of course, that's with a local file path, so the situation is completely hopeless when your images are on a network share. Unless the gallery app itself implements the network protocol, you're out of luck.
Wanna guess how often that happens? Yeah, it simply doesn't. Even if it's theoretically just a library, when you build it into the gallery app, that dev has to continually maintain and test it.
SSHFS actually works perfectly on android, just needs root. Here's the app I use.
It's funny how the README calls it a "VERY bad solution", but so far it's the only remote filesystem tool I've seen on android that could be described as anything close to usable.
I love how android uses ext internally, but doesn't support ext drives natively.
Also Windows: "Ask your network administrator for access."
Me: "Well I'm my own network administrator so what questions do you want me to ask myself"?
Windows: "Enter network username and password."
Me: There is no network username or password. Sod it, I'll bung them on an external disk.
That's a security quirk. Microsoft reeeeeally doesn't want you to do anonymous SMB anymore, and with every version of Windows, Microsoft has made is more complicated to get it working like that. It's probably still possible, but easier just to make a quick local user account and assign it read/write permissions to the share. Samba on Linux can still do it without as much fuss, but I've long since just accepted the extra step.
I just wish both these platforms would get some modern remote desktop support built in. Remoting into Mac/linux vs Windows desktops feels like dealing with tech from completely different time periods.
Thank god most of my Linux remote work is ssh on the cli.
Isn't MacOS based on a Unix kernel? Or did they evolve away from the core principle of treating everything as a file?
Youβre correct. Also you can sync files across all devices, built in. The meme is a bit fart sniffy.
Macos kernel is a mix of freebsd and mach. It's half UNIX from BSD side.
It's currently growing up like a teen wanting to be business major cause they resent their artist dad for being an artist or a math teacher instead of working in finance.
"Oh what does my dad do for living? He is like that redhat linux, in a way."
Why nobody mentions samba?? That is the only thing I knew
Samba (and NFS) require you to set shares up on the server's side. With sshfs, you don't need anything but a ssh login to your server. Black magic