Re: [Nautilus-list] Tales of multiplatformland, or else...

On Tue, Jun 05, 2001 at 11:14:57PM -0500, Ed McKenzie wrote:
> On 06 Jun 2001 00:28:27 -0300, Cesar Cardoso wrote:
> > Everybody here knows that Nautilus, as a part of GNOME, isn't tied to
> > any OS. It runs (or should run) on Linux, *BSD, Solaris, HP-UX etc. So
> > it must be the most platform-independent as it can be.
> > On the other hand, cross-platform programs still suffers from the
> > problem of speed - you can't use native/kernel services, you must
> > sometimes reinvent the wheel, you suffer.
> Putting smb in the kernel hasn't made it any faster, IMO.  Worse, I've
> observed smbfs to be pretty unreliable compared to smbclient -- smbfs
> can completely hang large numbers of processes when the server machine
> hiccups or crashes.
> So, I don't think Nautilus would lose anything by going with userland
> smb only.  It's not like you can't smbmount remote volumes from the
> console and then browse them with Nautilus.

No, we should put everything in the kernel. We can put nautilus in the kernel
too! It'll be just like DOS!



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]