[GH-ISSUE #2756] 1.96 release

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:50 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @gaul on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/2756

I want to run 1.96 to include https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/pull/1867 and allow Ubuntu 26.04 enough time to include this. We last released 1.95 in October 2024.

Originally created by @gaul on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/2756 I want to run 1.96 to include https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/pull/1867 and allow Ubuntu 26.04 enough time to include this. We last released 1.95 in October 2024.

kerem closed this issue

2026-03-04 01:52:50 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025):

Something to remind users about (even if it was on the 1.95 release notes)

CentOS7 is no longer supported (there's still people around using it, including people in RHEL7 or other spinoffs)

Regarding other OS, the tests at #1867 looks good. But outside that list I am not sure if we need to warn people about other unsupported OS if we know FUSE3 will not be there.

One where I think 1.96 will not build will be SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (LTSS for SP7 runs until 31 Oct 2030). Same for RHEL7 itself (ELS), and Ubuntu 20.04, 18.04 and 16.04 (on LTS) from what I can see.

Maybe one idea would be to tell the people do some homework and pay attention if they are on an OS under a program of Long Term Support, as there's a high chance 1.96 will not build or work.

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025): Something to remind users about (even if it was on the 1.95 release notes) - CentOS7 is no longer supported (there's still people around using it, including people in RHEL7 or other spinoffs) Regarding other OS, the tests at #1867 looks good. But outside that list I am not sure if we need to warn people about other unsupported OS if we know FUSE3 will not be there. One where I think 1.96 will not build will be SUSE Linux Enterprise 12 (LTSS for SP7 runs until 31 Oct 2030). Same for RHEL7 itself (ELS), and Ubuntu 20.04, 18.04 and 16.04 (on LTS) from what I can see. Maybe one idea would be to tell the people do some homework and pay attention if they are on an OS under a program of Long Term Support, as there's a high chance 1.96 will not build or work.

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gaul commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025):

While s3fs doesn't have an official support policy, in practice what CI contains is what we support. CI doesn't have SUSE 12 and its general support tier ended 31 Oct 2024: https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/#product-suse-linux-enterprise-server .

I don't think it is reasonable to provide free support for paid extended support distributions but maybe someone from those companies can contribute patches. Theoretically 1.96 will still compile with FUSE 2 although in practice we are only doing this to support macOS and hopefully only temporarily. It should be possible to configure a newer compiler for the C++14 dependency.

@gaul commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025): While s3fs doesn't have an official support policy, in practice what CI contains is what we support. CI doesn't have SUSE 12 and its general support tier ended 31 Oct 2024: https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/#product-suse-linux-enterprise-server . I don't think it is reasonable to provide free support for paid extended support distributions but maybe someone from those companies can contribute patches. Theoretically 1.96 will still compile with FUSE 2 although in practice we are only doing this to support macOS and hopefully only temporarily. It should be possible to configure a newer compiler for the C++14 dependency.

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025):

While s3fs doesn't have an official support policy, in practice what CI contains is what we support. CI doesn't have SUSE 12 and its general support tier ended 31 Oct 2024: https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/#product-suse-linux-enterprise-server .

Yes, I know, the same for all the others I listed.

I don't think it is reasonable to provide free support for paid extended support distributions but maybe someone from those companies can contribute patches. Theoretically 1.96 will still compile with FUSE 2 although in practice we are only doing this to support macOS and hopefully only temporarily. It should be possible to configure a newer compiler for the C++14 dependency.

Of course, I am not talking about providing free support, but rather about a warning at the release notes that things could not work anymore.

If 1.96 will still compile on FUSE2, then it's probably time to announce with 1.96 that FUSE2 is being deprecated and going away most likely in 1.97 (and a few examples of OS where only FUSE2 is provided, so people is aware).

About C++14, that could be (or not) a deal-breaker for those OS I mentioned (I'll need to check).

Again I am not saying s3fs should be fixed to keep the support. It's about warning users on the release notes :-)

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2025): > While s3fs doesn't have an official support policy, in practice what CI contains is what we support. CI doesn't have SUSE 12 and its general support tier ended 31 Oct 2024: https://www.suse.com/lifecycle/#product-suse-linux-enterprise-server . Yes, I know, the same for all the others I listed. > I don't think it is reasonable to provide free support for paid extended support distributions but maybe someone from those companies can contribute patches. Theoretically 1.96 will still compile with FUSE 2 although in practice we are only doing this to support macOS and hopefully only temporarily. It should be possible to configure a newer compiler for the C++14 dependency. Of course, I am not talking about providing free support, but rather about a warning at the release notes that things could not work anymore. If 1.96 will still compile on FUSE2, then it's probably time to announce with 1.96 that FUSE2 is being deprecated and going away most likely in 1.97 (and a few examples of OS where only FUSE2 is provided, so people is aware). About C++14, that could be (or not) a deal-breaker for those OS I mentioned (I'll need to check). Again I am not saying s3fs should be fixed to keep the support. It's about warning users on the release notes :-)

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025):

If 1.96 will still compile on FUSE2, then it's probably time to announce with 1.96 that FUSE2 is being deprecated and going away most likely in 1.97 (and a few examples of OS where only FUSE2 is provided, so people is aware).

I agree with this opinion.

@gaul
Why not clearly state in the release notes that the official transition to FUSE3 has been made, and that users who use FUSE2 will need to build it themselves?
It would be better to explain this, as users may be forced to make changes to their environment in order to use s3fs.
(At this point, it is still possible to build for FUSE2.)

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025): > If 1.96 will still compile on FUSE2, then it's probably time to announce with 1.96 that FUSE2 is being deprecated and going away most likely in 1.97 (and a few examples of OS where only FUSE2 is provided, so people is aware). I agree with this opinion. @gaul Why not clearly state in the release notes that the official transition to FUSE3 has been made, and that users who use FUSE2 will need to build it themselves? It would be better to explain this, as users may be forced to make changes to their environment in order to use s3fs. (At this point, it is still possible to build for FUSE2.)

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gaul commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025):

Proposed release notes:

* #1867 - Require FUSE 3 on Linux
* #2596 - Require C++14
* #2623 - Improve IO concurrency
* #2669 - Rename `-o endpoint` to `-o region` for clarity
* #2728 - #2731 - #2736 - Avoid HeadObject calls with improved stats cache usage

This release deprecates support for FUSE 2 on Linux.

@gaul commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025): Proposed release notes: ``` * #1867 - Require FUSE 3 on Linux * #2596 - Require C++14 * #2623 - Improve IO concurrency * #2669 - Rename `-o endpoint` to `-o region` for clarity * #2728 - #2731 - #2736 - Avoid HeadObject calls with improved stats cache usage This release deprecates support for FUSE 2 on Linux. ```

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025):

Thank you.
I think the contents of the release notes are fine.
We'll need to update the Installation Notes on the wiki to support FUSE3, but it might be a good idea to add instructions on how to build with FUSE2 to this page as well.

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2025): Thank you. I think the contents of the release notes are fine. We'll need to update the [Installation Notes](https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/wiki/Installation-Notes) on the wiki to support FUSE3, but it might be a good idea to add instructions on how to build with FUSE2 to this page as well.

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:51 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 25, 2025):

Congratulations! Version 1.96 released

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Nov 25, 2025): Congratulations! Version 1.96 released

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:52 +03:00

Author

Owner

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Dec 3, 2025):

@gaul / @ggtakec I was going to start preparing the bumping of RPMs to 1.96, but I noticed https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/2760.

I am undecided about what to do... Somehow I feel that PR needs attention, and if merged then I should include the patch when building the RPM for OS with FUSE3, and without it for systems still on FUSE2?

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Dec 3, 2025): @gaul / @ggtakec I was going to start preparing the bumping of RPMs to 1.96, but I noticed https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse/issues/2760. I am undecided about what to do... Somehow I feel that PR needs attention, and if merged then I should include the patch when building the RPM for OS with FUSE3, and without it for systems still on FUSE2?

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:52 +03:00

Author

Owner

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025):

@juliogonzalez Thanks for your notice.
I've merged #2765 by @gaul, now.

The fix in #2765 uses ifdef to differentiate between different FUSE versions, so I think you can use the same code(patch) for both FUSE2 and FUSE3.
I don't think it will require as complicated a patch as you're worried about.

@ggtakec commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025): @juliogonzalez Thanks for your notice. I've merged #2765 by @gaul, now. The fix in #2765 uses `ifdef` to differentiate between different FUSE versions, so I think you can use the same code(patch) for both FUSE2 and FUSE3. I don't think it will require as complicated a patch as you're worried about.

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:52 +03:00

Author

Owner

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025):

@ggtakec ACK.

In terms of RPMs, we don't need a re-release for this, I can just apply your patch unconditionally for all RPMs. On paper, all other package maintainers should be able to the same.

From a pure s3fs-fuse perspective, as now FUSE3 is the default and FUSE2 deprecated, not sure if you want a 1.96.1 release so people compiling from source doesn't need to apply the patch on their own.

If that's the case, let me know because then I will go from 1.95 to 1.96.1 for the RPMs.

@juliogonzalez commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025): @ggtakec ACK. In terms of RPMs, we don't need a re-release for this, I can just apply your patch unconditionally for all RPMs. On paper, all other package maintainers should be able to the same. From a pure s3fs-fuse perspective, as now FUSE3 is the default and FUSE2 deprecated, not sure if you want a 1.96.1 release so people compiling from source doesn't need to apply the patch on their own. If that's the case, let me know because then I will go from 1.95 to 1.96.1 for the RPMs.

kerem commented

2026-03-04 01:52:52 +03:00

Author

Owner

@gaul commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025):

Tagging a new release 1.97 is lightweight so let's block RPMs on it. Let's give this a few more days to see any bugs from early adopters but otherwise I'll run a release this weekend.

@gaul commented on GitHub (Dec 4, 2025): Tagging a new release 1.97 is lightweight so let's block RPMs on it. Let's give this a few more days to see any bugs from early adopters but otherwise I'll run a release this weekend.

Rows
Columns

[GH-ISSUE #2756] 1.96 release #1290