-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
FUSE IPNS does not update/save new hash (0.4.0) #2168
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
@Kubuxu is this still an issue? |
Just tired it again, it is still an issue. I also got following log during ipfs daemon close:
|
Still an issue. Is there some reason not to fix it? |
It's (silently) not getting very far in this function for the same reason that the |
Are the linked pull requests above still relevant? It doesn't look like this was ever reviewed properly. I'm running into the "Error: cannot manually publish while IPNS is mounted" even though I don't have IPNS mounted. I did run
I could of course restart the daemon and that would fix the problem but I don't really want to do that right now. |
Not the author but a few years ago I was reimplementing the Bypassing the lock is not going to solve the problem fundamentally, it's just going to remove the safeguard that was put in place to prevent conflicting concurrent access. The way I ended up dealing with it was adding refining the locking semantics into a resource locking API in the daemon's core, and then utilizing it in other parts like the IPNS code. This could have been exposed to the public API as well to allow this to work remotely. You can see a demo of that working here though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX0vM0Ay9Z0&list=PLrZxGPqQuwHC_cZF2assuM0Vl3D5s5OSN&index=11 That demo uses my fork of the daemon which includes the locks to handle remote MFS and IPNS modifications without conflicts and ports the mount code to more platforms than just Linux, and without a lot of the shortcoming the current implementation has. But that was also not well received so that effort also went nowhere. Personally, I'd rather have something that works and can be refined instead of nothing for several years. I wonder if anyone can come up with some lockless approach using some arcane magic. For what it's worth, the remote resource locking API is something I still need in order for to implement client software that mounts IPNS and MFS without requiring forking the code base and/or have access to the daemon's internal APIs. |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: