XPost: comp.sys.mac.system, alt.comp.os.windows-10, comp.mobile.android   
   From: nospam@needed.invalid   
      
   On Tue, 4/15/2025 5:31 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:   
   > On 2025-04-15 20:27, Frank Slootweg wrote:   
      
   >>    In Windows you can't specify a source path for a 'copy', etc., because   
   >> such a path does not exist for MTP, so - being an old Unix/UNIX and   
   >> current GNU user - I am interested what it looks like on Linux (for   
   >> MTP).   
   >>   
   >>    Or is the source just a path relative to /run/user/1000/gvfs/mtp?   
   >>   
   >> [...]   
   >   
   > It is an emulation layer. MTP does not support every operation a true   
   filesystem does.   
      
   MTP supports objects, and a read and write operation on those objects.   
      
   Whereas MTPfs is the FUSE file system (created as a wrapper, without any   
   control over   
   or conversation with the designers of MTP).   
      
   An ordinary file system, would work with a partition and a physical layer.   
   That's why it needs more disk operating commands at that physical layer.   
      
   MTP does exactly what is required of it. It is a "minimalist" design,   
   which is "over-minimalized". It is inefficient. MTPfs would be an attempt   
   to try to fix it, from a distance.   
      
   But doing all this flopping about, is just bad. It should be a case study for   
   a comp.sci class. You'll notice Google tried to fix it, to fix one of the   
   worst aspects of it -- and that hints, if there had been more industry   
   input in the first place, it would not have been such a pudgy disaster.   
      
      Paul   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)