Posted by: Nathan Willis
on November 22, 2005 04:26 AM
For the record, GNOME's file manager Nautilus also handles SSH out of the box. You just type the URL ssh://user@hostname.tld etc in the address field. So you don't have to be a KDE user, either. I'm not sure about XFCE or other DEs.
What makes sshfs good is that it works without having to go through the GUI file manager; therefore it works for all command line tools, scripts, etc.
Also, I don't agree that the sshfs instructions in the article are more of a "complication" than any other method. A lot of the "complication" of using sshfs is really SSH complexity -- which users will need to do in order to access SSH shares via KDE or GNOME GUI clients as well. For a side-by-side comparison, you'd need to add that setup to the Konqueror instructions as well.
I also took some space to describe how to install FUSE, because users need to know how to do that until all distros ship with FUSE configured by default; for comparison's sake you'd have to add in instructions for installing Konqueror, or alternatively compare methods on a system with FUSE built-in.
And last but not least, part of the instructions relate to having sshfs mount remote SSH shares on startup, something not addressed in these Konqueror instructions. I don't even know if you can mount remote volumes on startup using Konqueror or Nautilus, but something tells me you can't, as they're interactive GUI apps.
Don't misunderstand me; I'm not knocking Konqueror. It's just that sshfs is extremely easy to set up, very difficult to mess up, and the parent post was really comparing apples and oranges.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:"fish://myhost.mydomain.myorg" (with Konqueror)
Posted by: Nathan Willis on November 22, 2005 04:26 AMWhat makes sshfs good is that it works without having to go through the GUI file manager; therefore it works for all command line tools, scripts, etc.
Also, I don't agree that the sshfs instructions in the article are more of a "complication" than any other method. A lot of the "complication" of using sshfs is really SSH complexity -- which users will need to do in order to access SSH shares via KDE or GNOME GUI clients as well. For a side-by-side comparison, you'd need to add that setup to the Konqueror instructions as well.
I also took some space to describe how to install FUSE, because users need to know how to do that until all distros ship with FUSE configured by default; for comparison's sake you'd have to add in instructions for installing Konqueror, or alternatively compare methods on a system with FUSE built-in.
And last but not least, part of the instructions relate to having sshfs mount remote SSH shares on startup, something not addressed in these Konqueror instructions. I don't even know if you can mount remote volumes on startup using Konqueror or Nautilus, but something tells me you can't, as they're interactive GUI apps.
Don't misunderstand me; I'm not knocking Konqueror. It's just that sshfs is extremely easy to set up, very difficult to mess up, and the parent post was really comparing apples and oranges.
Nate
#