Comment on introducing copyparty, the FOSS file server
disobey2623@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
I looked at the comparison for Seafile as that’s the one I’m most familiar with. In my opinion Seafile’s greatest strength is its encryption, but in your comparison you seem to see this as a negative as I assume this bullet refers to the encryption? “isolated on-disk file hierarchy, incompatible with other software. much worse than nextcloud in that regard”
tripflag@lemmy.world 1 day ago
the intention with that statement was that seafile, by default, places all the files inside its own proprietary file container thing, where the files are not easily accessible from the server’s actual filesystem, using regular linux utilities. My knowledge of seafile is really minimal, so this could be wrong – in which case I’ll fix that right away! or, at the very least, try to clarify what I meant to avoid this confusion.
in case you happen to know – are you aware if it’s possible to use Seafile while having it just place all the files and folders on the disk like any other program would?
Andres4NY@social.ridetrans.it 1 day ago
@tripflag @disobey2623 Your statement is correct; the way seafile stores files is in blocks (for de-duplication, apparently).
They offer a fuse extension that allows you to view stuff like a normal filesystem, though I've never tried it: https://manual.seafile.com/latest/extension/fuse/
disobey2623@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
And obviously, encrypted folders can’t be accessed through the file system even with the fuse add on, because that would break the whole point of encryption.
To me, the one big advantage Seafile has is its e2e encryption and encrypted folders, as it allows me to host it externally without allowing access to my files to the server administrator.