36

Mounting Git commits as folders with NFS

> None of these are the most efficient way to do this (you can use git show and git log -S or maybe git grep to accomplish something similar), but personally I always forget the syntax and navigating a filesystem feels easier to me.

i feel like some of the old-school commands will benefit from long args, e.g., '--search'. at the time of writing, the current `git log` documentation[1]'s `-S' has _one_ instance of the word 'search'.

(un)related to the article, author went on to contribute documentation updates to git, which were much needed [2]

[1]: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-log#Documentation/git-log.txt--... [2]: https://jvns.ca/blog/2026/01/08/a-data-model-for-git/

an hour agothewisenerd

What, you didn't know to search for pickaxe!? :-)

Meanwhile, --grep searches the log message. Yeah, the git CLI is an ergonomic nightmare and I've been using it since the very beginning.

FWIW, I can't think of a single time I've wanted to use -S instead of -G.

an hour agojs2

The dot-com era called. They want ClearCase back.

8 minutes agodeepspace

FTA: “problem 1: webdav or NFS?

The two filesystems I could that were natively supported by Mac OS were WebDav and NFS. I couldn’t tell which would be easier to implement so I just tried both”

I might find out that it is incomplete, buggy or a nuisance to use, but FSKit (https://developer.apple.com/documentation/FSKit) would be my first choice.

2 days agoSomeone

macOS actually has an excellent SMB client, so the options actually are: WebDAV, NFS (3.0 and 4.0), SMB, FSKit.

2 hours agoblaz0

By excellent do you mean bearable? macOS’s SMB stack is certainly not excellent.

an hour agooefrha

Won't the SMB implementation be sufficient to mount git commits as folders?

21 minutes agonine_k

By bearable do you mean it exists? It's fucking shite.

42 minutes agoadi_kurian

Which is why I'm so angry they're killing AFP. It works so much better and is super easy to set up a server for on a Linux

13 minutes agodonatj

AFAIK, SMB doesn't support symbolic links.

42 minutes agojs2
[deleted]
an hour ago

[delayed]

4 minutes agoeverybodyknows

This is my favorite cursed finding: https://github.com/zevweiss/booze

FUSE-bindings for "filesystems in bash", eg:

https://github.com/zevweiss/booze/blob/master/cowsayfs.sh#L5...

    cs_read()
    {
      if ! [[ "$1" =~ ^/($cowpat)/[^/]+$ ]]; then
        booze_err=-$EINVAL
        return 1
      elif [ "$3" != 0 ]; then
        return 0
      fi

      local msg="${1#/*/}"
      local cow="${1#/}"
      cow="${cow%%/*}"
      cowsay -f "$cow" "$msg"
    }
...I think that WebDAV is "the way" compared to FUSE, but I'm always intrigued by the idea of virtual filesystems as an implementation face.
29 minutes agoramses0

Given the advent of LLMs and agentic coding, I believe this article needs re-visiting as it makes it much more discoverable to compare individual files across commits.

2 days agopvtmert

Nice idea. But when taking commits as folders one should delete, add and remame files in the folder and that is not possible in a commit because it creates another commit. So I think this is nit the right mental model

an hour agoulrischa

Files and folders can be read-only, a concept that has been around for about as long as the folders abstraction itself.

an hour agowtallis

NFS.. stop right there

an hour agosteveBK123

You're being downvoted, but, seriously... NFS is a joke for anything outside of an enterprise setup with a bunch of ancillary support services in place.

The fact that NFSv4 has no concept of true "Authentication" and just blindly accepts whatever the client sends is the craziest network application design ever:

  Client: Hi, NFS server, I'm Bob! UID=1000
  Server: Hi Bob! Here's access to all of Bob's files! I trust you and don't need a password or anything!
  Client: Thanks!!!
Some of you may nitpick and say, "well ackkkuallyy, NFS supports authentication through GSSAPI/krb."

And to you, I say, that's crazy! Setting up Kerberos just to authenticate users for access to my Linux ISOs is a crazy large requirement! Sure, it might make sense for an enterprise that already uses Kerberos + LDAP + NFS + certificate management, but for everyone else, that's a lot of infrastructure to set up and maintain for what should be BASIC functionality.

EDIT

ALSO!!! Why the fork does NFS run as a kernel module (nfsd)!? Shouldn't that be an external daemon!? Who the heck thought any of this was a good idea!?

  <sarcasm mode> 
    Dev1: Here's a great idea! Let's run an insecure network server in Kernel space! 
    Dev2: OMG! You're so smart! Let's also exclude any encryption!!!
 </>
//end rant of an old, bitter Linux sysadmin
21 minutes agommh0000

Funny part is, that NFSv4 supports SIDs for user authentication, but the Linux implementation leaves it out (among all the other ACL features) simply on the basis that Linux doesn't support them at all.

The FreeBSD, Solaris, Mac OS X, and Windows (yes, even Windows) implementations of NFSv4 are fully featured with this stuff.

11 minutes agochungy

Does this mean that I can connect to an NFS server saying my UID=0 and get local root?

19 minutes agonine_k

Usually, no. NFS defaults to "root_squash," which silently changes UID=0 to the UID of the `nfsnobody` user.

However, in the /etc/exports file, you can (but shouldn't) add the share option "no_root_squash" which disables that.

So, root access is slightly protected. But all other users are wide open.

14 minutes agommh0000