Talk:GVfs

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

After reading this article, I have no clue what GVFS is about. Can somebody write a short introduction and not just refer to GnomeVFS? FAThomssen (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GVFS is an abstraction layer, that allows software to work with different physical or virtual filesystems completely transparently. Some software might just use kernel drivers directly to work with specific filesystem, but GVFS allows higher interfaces, requiring less code duplication and more abilities. It has nothing to do with HAL/udev etc - those are hardware event signalers. 77.180.80.248 (talk) 01:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. All I know about this GVFS is that it is causing all sorts of crazy errors ever since I upgraded my computer. The main thing I want to know is how to get rid of it. But some explanation of what the people who made it were thinking might help. 68.110.107.158 (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is very badly written. From the current description it appears that gvfs provides file-browsers and other similar applications the ability to browse more that local or network file systems: things like the HAL device tree, or files accessed via ssh or FTP. The file-browser application has a unified view of these virtual file-systems via a shared library, but each backend (for HAL or FTP or whatever) is implemented as its own separate daemon process. The shared library and the daemons communicate via D-Bus, and the integration with FUSE allows any application to see and interact with these virtual file-systems without being specially written to use the gvfs shared library. ...or something. ghw=87.113.55.244 (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Six years in and still it appears nobody has bothered to, or can, explain what good this thing is or why we should tolerate all the new errors and crashes it introduces. Why do I want "an abstraction layer" when I'm just trying to open a local file on my ordinary hard disk -- much less another daemon running all the time? The "man page" for gvfsd says pretty much the same collection of nothing. I don't like it, I don't want it, it causes me problems for no value added. Why is it there? How can I obliterate it? Someone who knows something about this thing please explain. 68.110.104.114 (talk) 01:37, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have a suggestion (19 mai 2016, 08h34):

Somebody who is neither an IT-expert, nor commercial and using GVFS (as far as she/he knows) should write just what it is good for. We or you can still decide where in the article the information should be placed. My problems with the text are about the same as yours, only I know the words and understand their meaning. But I have no use for GVFS other than listen to somebody's complaints, nod understandingly, then decide once again to not bother with it.--88.202.70.163 (talk) 06:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I just learned that it existed something like 30 minutes ago. I did because from my Ubuntu / Gnome 3 virtual machine I accessed both one of our servers and my windows host. For that you need to mount the exports (it's just a click in the Filemanager). I then decided to follow the URL and saw that it was in a directory called /run/gvfs... hence htat I figured out the name and sought for it.

What it does is quite simple: If you work on a network (such as in my case) you can mount "shares" or remote directories and folders as if they were local and work with these as if they were on your computer, independently from what protocol you need to access these shares of folders: I can for instance have direct access to my C: drive, a couple of USB3 hard drives attached to my laptop and one of the Linux servers on our datacentres. Three of these shares are connected using SMB and one via SSH, but this is handled by GVFS so that I only have to connect to the server much like you do in a Mac. It doesn't only allow me to use the Filemanager to do stuff, but I can also use bash just as I were on my local computer and run scripts, etc. Runlevel0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runlevel0 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great! ... when it works. When it doesn't the user has no idea why or what this abstraction layer is or does: system broken. Then search everywhere, get into laberinthic explanations, dozens of possible causes and tiredness at checking this and that. Boot a live cd and everything works as it should: hardware is OK.

Is this not mushed candy in a spoonful so that the user does not have to do any learning whatsoever nor know anything about what he/she is using? Why not place another two or 3 layers on top so that one only has to think it and voilá! it's done!? } ; ) Already feel like a passenger on the space cruise depicted in the film Wally?

I'm writing this while I wait for mc to delete 200 and some files in .local/share/gvfs-metadata (it's half way through and it's taken 18 minutes) because I've read it reduces the sloppiness created apparently by this "simple abstraction layer" that promises heaven. My Debian 8 systemd was working fine until yesterday and I'm trying to figure out why it became as slow as a 286 with floppies just because this journaling on top of another journaling, buffering, catching and what not. I maybe exagerating and using terms I do not even know what they really mean. An encyclopedia is suposed to explain what things are to non-expert people so they understand it. Not a jargon-ladden talk among experts on the field. No need to make a device to install on a doorknob so that the user only has to press a button for the device to turn the knob and so open the door ...

Planning on installing LFS and forgetting about all this ultra-mega-advanced improvements from some nirvana out there  : ( --FelipeTD (talk) 22:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is the idea of a Virtual File System and an API to provide access to this VFS. The GIO library provides an implementation of the VFS API. GVfs provides implementations that go beyond that, what GIO provides. GVfs does not replace GIO, but it depends on GIO and is build on top of GIO. GVfs is NOT a single library, but a collection of things. The main thing is gvfsd. gvfsd is autostarted by "GIO clients" if it is not already running. gvfsd then starts other things such as gvfsd-mtp or gvfs-mtp-volume-monitor as required. User:ScotXW^t@lk 22:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From above: If you work on a network ... you can mount "shares" OK but what if you don't? I just discovered my backups have been failing for the past 17 days. Tracked it down to root cause: errors from gvfs. Came here to find out WTH this is and what good is it... apparently I'm not alone given that we have nearly 10 years now of reports of trouble. Please improve article with information about how to get rid of it when not needed and/or causing harm. Thanks. 72.208.150.248 (talk) 22:17, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please check out Wikipedia:WikiProject GNOME. User:ScotXW^t@lk 22:46, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is just a fact, something no one can doubt of (not in plain reasonable justifications). Same about most of things "Gnome-related". And I think (I do think) the open-source paradigm does not any correlation with communities (plural), but with the very foundation of computational technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.235.34.27 (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]