Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
using local_cache? if so then try disabling it and retrying (or just rm -rf the
local
cache)
Original comment by rri...@gmail.com
on 20 Mar 2009 at 5:23
I have tried...
s3fs fresh /mnt -ouse_cache=0
I cannot find the local_cache to remove it...
Could it be it is because i used s3 Organiser (firefox addon) to create the
bucket?
Original comment by gmil...@gmail.com
on 20 Mar 2009 at 6:27
Seeing exactly the same problem on Fedora 8 with latest build
Original comment by fiddlest...@gmail.com
on 8 Apr 2010 at 7:37
Can one of you guys try this again with the latest tarball or svn revision? If
you're still seeing the same results, let's work together so we can get it
re-created and debugged. Thanks.
Original comment by dmoore4...@gmail.com
on 10 Nov 2010 at 6:32
Same problem here with version r203 on my EU West micro instance trying to
access to my EU S3 bucket.
Ready to help if needed. Just tell me what you need to know
Original comment by jose.ra...@gmail.com
on 3 Dec 2010 at 10:11
Jose, there have been many improvements and bug fixes since r203, please
download, compile, install and test the latest tarball. Thanks.
If things still don't work right, then I'll need your /etc/fstab entry or your
command line invocation.
I have Fedora 14 and CentOS 5.5 in which I can try to duplicate the issue.
Remember, the mixing S3 clients (S3Fox, bucket explorer, ...) with s3fs is
incompatible and not currently supported. (reading shouldn't present too much
of a problem, but if you create files/directories with another client, s3fs
will not recognize them -- I'm not sure if this is contributing to your issue
or not?)
Original comment by dmoore4...@gmail.com
on 3 Dec 2010 at 4:57
Thanks!
I was mixing clients. I see that they are not very compatible between each
other (for instance, now they mistake s3fs-created folders as files so I cannot
access them).
I also have installed r271.
Keep on the good work. This is a really needed solution for EC2/S3.
Original comment by jose.ra...@gmail.com
on 7 Dec 2010 at 10:25
Looks like a couple of contributing factors here. s3fs-specific issues appear
to have been addressed.
Original comment by dmoore4...@gmail.com
on 7 Dec 2010 at 5:21
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
gmil...@gmail.com
on 20 Mar 2009 at 4:44