> On May 29, 2024, at 2:27 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 05:02:00AM +0200, Dan Shelton wrote: >> One syntax across all platforms? > > And what exatly would be the use case for that? It's not like > mounting file systems is portable in any kind of way. Dan, administrative interfaces generally need to work the same across only one operating system. I know Linux might look like a jumble of commands, but there has been a long- term effort to get the commands to look and feel the same here. You will see that cathedral-designed OSes like Windows have much better alignment across their admin tools, though they often have little resemblance to tools on other OSes (such as compared to MacOS). Moreover, there's no mandate anywhere that admin interfaces are portable among operating systems. One exception is, of course, mount for NFS, and that's entirely because of automount, which pulls maps from an LDAP directory that is often shared among heterogeneous systems. There are a set of mount options that are the same every- where due to that, but there's no standard that describes or mandates these (and no, that's not what RFC 2224 does). Protocol interoperability does not require this, and actual protocol standards are often ambiguous precisely in order to allow each implementation to provide its own unique set of features and value-add. So far, we haven't found any real value for supporting NFS URLs on Linux, so they are not implemented here. We could if there is a clear technical need to, but so far you have not articulated one. Now in general, when you make a feature request, you do need to present user stories [1] and use cases [2] so we can understand: - what is lacking in the current environment - who will use the requested feature and how That's just simple good design process. Please include those in your requests so we don't have to go back and forth with you yet again when you post single-sentence feature requests from out of the blue. What might seem obvious to you is not always clear to us, and it's especially important because you are asking us to design build and maintain code AT NO COST TO YOU. Please show some respect for that. (I'll note that Mr. Blancher's comment about inter- nationalized domain names is on point, but I'm not convinced that NFS URLs are necessary to support them. mount.nfs was converted, years ago, to use the getaddrinfo(3) and getnameinfo(3) APIs so it should already handle iDNA properly. If it doesn't that's a bug, IMO). -- Chuck Lever [1] https://www.productplan.com/glossary/user-story/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_case
