Created attachment 145627 [details]
This is a simple patch to implement encfs_create by just calling mknod then open
I was looking at how EncFS was implemented on FreeBSD and read the recent updates made to the port.
Since the the port includes modifications added to FreeBSD 10, I'm wondering if it's subject to the same problem described here:
"Using encfs on FreeBSD 10.0 compiles okay, mounts the encrypted filesystem, and even lets you create, list and delete directories. Attempting to create a file (even with something simple like "touch") returns ENOSYS. The problem can be traced to FreeBSD 10's kernel implementation of FUSE. Older FUSE implementations could handle encfs_create being undefined, they'd fall back on calling encfs_mknod then encfs_open. In FreeBSD 10, it tries calling encfs_create which returns ENOSYS and fails to create the file."
The submitter also included a patch, attached here.
I didn't see any mention of this bug, but thought I'd mention it.
There's no attachment though...
There's also no maintainer for this port either (quite common for fuse ports, actually).
The attachment may not have been sent by email, but it's in the bug report
But if there is no maintainer... :D
it wasn't there when I wrote that! strange..
No maintainer means nobody needs to approve it. It can be committed by anybody starting now. Moving to patch-ready status.
A commit references this bug:
Date: Wed Aug 13 20:48:03 UTC 2014
New revision: 364809
sysutils/fuse-encfs: Implement encfs_create for F10 to create file
Submitted by: Olivier/InterfaSys
Approved by: nobody; the port is unmaintained
ok done, I hope the patch is correct... (it builds)
I've just tested the port on FreeBSD 9 and "make" worked (after modifying a previous patch).