Rename fuse(4) to fusefs(4)

[asomers]

Summary

Rename fuse(4) to fusefs(4)

This makes it more consistent with other filesystems, which all end in "fs",
and more consistent with its mount helper, which is already named
"mount_fusefs".

[asomers]

This change exposes a bug, but I'll deal with that separately: when you "kldload fusefs", the module that gets loaded is named "fuse".

[asomers]

The kldload issue is https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236647

[cem]

Please don't move the directory from sys/fs/fuse to sys/fs/fusefs. It just adds needless churn to the history.

[rgrimes]

Please have a discussion on arch@ or filesystems@, this review needs more discussion

[cem]

The moduledata changes, sysctl changes, jail changes, renaming the kld, etc, look good to me. And the backwards compat symlink is a nice touch as well. But please don't move the filesystem sources.

Edit: And feel free to ignore Rod's request for additional bikeshedding. He has a history of isolated demands for rigor, gross misrepresentation of the truth as it pertains to project norms, and generally verbose and largely wrong feedback. In this case, like most cases, Rod's request for additional discussion is non-normative and a waste of the energies of both the patch submitter and other reviewers.

[asomers]

Don't rename the sys/fs/fuse source files

[cem]

Looks good other than sys/conf/files

sys/conf/files

3497–3505

These changes should be reverted, too

[asomers]

Don't rename files in sys/conf/files

[bdragon]

Note: The LINKS= line breaks installkernel on systems where /boot is a msdos filesystem (currently needed on some petitboot systems on powerpc64 -- Talos II in particular, due to lack of UFS support in the default PNOR builds)

[asomers]

In D19649#422317, @git_bdragon.rtk0.net wrote:

Note: The LINKS= line breaks installkernel on systems where /boot is a msdos filesystem (currently needed on some petitboot systems on powerpc64 -- Talos II in particular, due to lack of UFS support in the default PNOR builds)

Whats the suggested workaround? I don't see anything in either sys/modules/em/Makefile or sys/modules/iavf/Makefile.

[jhibbits]

Neither em(4) nor iavf(4) are built as modules for powerpc, so cannot be used as examples. I don't have a good answer for you on this, maybe installkernel needs to be aware of LINKS and instead of creating links create either symlinks or copies? Are symlinks supported on msdosfs?

[asomers]

The problem with symlinks is that the loader allegedly doesn't grok them (I haven't verified this myself). What if we modify install(1) to handle EOPNOTSUP during link(2) by falling back to copying?

[asomers]

@git_bdragon.rtk0.net the powerpc problem should be fixed by r346765. Thanks for reporting it!