It worked, but broke again.
$ eng apt list --installed fuse3 gvfs-fuse libfuse*
fuse3/unstable,now 3.17.1-1 amd64 [installed,automatic]
gvfs-fuse/unstable,now 1.57.2-2 amd64 [installed]
libfuse2t64/unstable,now 2.9.9-9 amd64 [installed,automatic]
libfuse3-4/unstable,now 3.17.1-
Control: clone -1 -2
Control: reassign -2 libfuse3-4
Control: retitle -2 libfuse3-4: regression in filesystems that use
fuse_conn_info.want
Control: severity -2 important
Control: forwarded -2 https://github.com/libfuse/libfuse/issues/1171
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 at 13:34:36 +0100, László Böszörmény
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 at 16:40:11 +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 4:27 PM Simon McVittie wrote:
I think your footnotes have got lost?
I don't know if it was lost or not. It's in the bug log at least:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1101025#39
Hu
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 4:27 PM Simon McVittie wrote:
> I think your footnotes have got lost?
I don't know if it was lost or not. It's in the bug log at least:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1101025#39
> Is [4] perhaps meant to point to commit "fuse: use
> fuse_(un)set_feature
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 at 13:34:36 +0100, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote:
Quick check done. It seems in the past FUSE capabilities were a 32
bit bitfield. It was moved to a 64 bit struct, causing an ABI break.
It was handled by the SONAME bump and more importantly the FUSE helper
functions started t
Hi,
I believe this is related to #1100487, and that it if gvfs-fuse that is
what really is failing.
Jens
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 1:06 PM Jeremy Bícha wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 7:51 AM Jens Yllman wrote:
> > So, the question is fuse doing this wrong or is gvfs-fuse doing it wrong?
>
> I don't know. Someone should report the issue to the gvfs maintainers also.
Quick check done. It seems i
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 7:51 AM Jens Yllman wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 07:32:58 -0400 =?UTF-8?Q?Jeremy_B=C3=ADcha?=
> wrote:
> > One major difference is that 1.57.2-1+b1 was built against fuse
> > 3.17.1~rc1 instead of fuse 3.14.
> >
> > Would you be interested in reporting this issue to the gv
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 07:32:58 -0400 =?UTF-8?Q?Jeremy_B=C3=ADcha?=
wrote:
Control: severity -1 serious
Control: affects -1 src:fuse3
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 7:15 AM Jens Yllman wrote:
> I also wonder why we who have this problem have version 1.57.2-1+b1 when
> the official sites like PTS and Sal
Control: severity -1 serious
Control: affects -1 src:fuse3
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 7:15 AM Jens Yllman wrote:
> I also wonder why we who have this problem have version 1.57.2-1+b1 when
> the official sites like PTS and Salsa have no list of that version. And
> there is no way to see what is chang
Hi,
I also wonder why we who have this problem have version 1.57.2-1+b1 when
the official sites like PTS and Salsa have no list of that version. And
there is no way to see what is changed.
Jens
On Sat, 22 Mar 2025 11:48:52 +0100 Jens Yllman wrote:
Hi,
I believe this is related to #1100487
Package: gvfs-fuse
Version: 1.57.2-1+b1
Severity: important
Dear Maintainer, /usr/libexec/gvfsd-fuse refuses to start, leaving filesystems
accessed via gvfs without real mountpoint representation.
Error message as reported by gvfsd:
gvfsd[3623]: fuse: both 'want' and 'want_ext' are set
Same
12 matches
Mail list logo
