[HN Gopher] 10 years since Google said to "hang tight" about Lin... ___________________________________________________________________ 10 years since Google said to "hang tight" about Linux support for Google Drive Author : politelemon Score : 277 points Date : 2022-04-24 16:40 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (abevoelker.github.io) (TXT) w3m dump (abevoelker.github.io) | wzm wrote: | https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/35904387 ipv6 support in | GCP is similar, it's at 9 years now. | dreen wrote: | Websockets still not generally available, ticket opened in 2009 | https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/35886348 | dudus wrote: | There's really no reason to use AppEngine these days. I | believe it still exists for legacy apps. You should be using | Cloud run. Cloud run support WebSockets[1]. | | If you already have an AppEngine App you can always keep it | and create a CloudRun app to handle the WebSocket part and | they communicate well. | | [1]: https://cloud.google.com/run/docs/triggering/websockets | [deleted] | cloudking wrote: | The market size is not big enough to justify the internal costs | of building and maintaining it. | | For dev environments, you can workaround it using Windows + Drive | filestream + WSL. | https://github.com/microsoft/WSL/issues/2999#issuecomment-91... | jchw wrote: | When I worked at Google, almost all developer workstations were | running Linux. That alone really should be plenty of | justification for having such a client. They did not. | imajoredinecon wrote: | As a Google employee, you almost never need to store anything | on Drive, do you? I'm struggling to think of a "sync my | files" workflow where corp Drive would have been the best | solution if only there had been a Linux client. | shadowgovt wrote: | As a Google employee using Linux, the kind of files I | stored in Drive were rarely useful synced to my filesystem. | jchw wrote: | To be clear, I would've preferred something more like a | FUSE implementation, which thankfully exists for someone | outside of Google. | | There is FileStream or whatever it's called, but it's | never coming to Linux so who cares. | jchw wrote: | If you needed to share files outside of code or what have | you, you would have to use Google Drive. Perhaps not all | developers wind up needing this very often. But | realistically, for me, the majority of the benefit would've | been integration. I'm sorry, but browsing files in a web | browser absolutely sucks. Even if double clicking a | document only opened Google Docs, that would still be a | usability win. | | At my current workplace I use a FUSE driver to get Google | Drive in my file browser and I wouldn't have it any other | way. | cloudking wrote: | Internally is a lot different than externally | https://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market- | sha... | jchw wrote: | You're missing my point. | cloudking wrote: | Your point is a lot of internal developers use Linux so | they should make a Linux drive client, my counterpoint is | that dedicating engineering resources to building and | maintaining such a project is not worth the cost. | Management looks at the cost and ROI of developing and | maintaining projects, in this case the ROI from having a | Linux client that would likely need 5-10 SWEs to maintain | is not worth it for them. They have to ensure the client | is compatible with multiple flavors of Linux releases, | monitor security issues etc it's a big ongoing cost. If | more consumers and businesses used Linux, they could | justify the cost. | | I'm not saying this is the right move, but I'm explaining | why this project hasn't been funded. | jchw wrote: | If Google made a calculated decision to not implement | Drive on Linux, it wasn't clear to me, nor did I ever | hear that in or out of Google. | ilrwbwrkhv wrote: | Google is a me too company now. Innovation left the company a | long time ago. That is why I tell startups I invest in, not to | worry at all if Google enters their space. | encryptluks2 wrote: | What are you even talking about? Let's look at the opposite end | of the spectrum for innovation like Truth Social or Parler. | Those are absolute Trash. | jchw wrote: | Times have changed in many more ways than one. | | These days I greatly prefer to own my data more directly, which I | accomplish using a NAS. I don't use Dropbox OR Google Drive, I | use Syncthing, which can do stuff that neither of those could | ever dream of in terms of syncing between machines. | | Not only do I _not_ want Google Drive, I don't even want anything | like it. | | That said, I totally get why it's still important. I do use | Google Drive at work and for that type of use case I would not | argue in favor of self-hosting. Syncthing is great for a single | person or even a fairly large group of people, but not for a big | organization. Not to mention you probably use Google Docs or | Office 365 anyways, both of which are integrated with their | respective company's storage offerings. Syncthing won't give you | directory sync, docs integration, or granular ACLs. | | But that's actually perfectly fine, because I don't need any of | those things. Hell, I flat out don't really want them. You could | probably get something similar with ownCloud which I did try | running, and I'm not even particularly enticed. I'm sure Synology | has a full suite as well, but it's not what I want out of my NAS. | Part of being happier with my technology was just as much | realizing what I _didn't_ want as it was realizing what I wanted. | bpye wrote: | I'm curious, what do you use to access files on your NAS? I've | used Samba for forever but it's always been kind of annoying to | deal with permissions, and whilst running AD would probably | solve that, I then have to deal with running AD. I'm tempted to | try switching to NFS instead. | jchw wrote: | Samba. I tried AD very briefly before realizing how | absolutely terrible of an idea it was. It just makes life so | complicated, and AD integration was not as good as I was | hoping. I can see why this market constantly has all kinds of | crazy offerings... | | As far as permissions go, I guess I am mostly ignoring | granular permissions. I'm generally only concerned with | permissions on a per-share basis. This way, file permissions | mostly don't matter and can be a one-and-done affair. Then, I | can split files up into separate shares. | | NFS also seemed appealing, but honestly it does seem to bring | a lot of complexity that SMB/CIFS does not, and everything | supports the latter well enough for my use cases. | | Remote access is another issue, since you should probably not | do SMB over the internet, but I guess that can be solved with | Tailscale or ZeroTier. | frontierkodiak wrote: | I've been very happy with self-hosting a Seafile instance to | serve as a personal cloud for myself and a small academic ML | team. I built a small NAS, Proxmox runs on baremetal, on top of | which there's an ubuntu VM running a Seafile docker instance. | Fantastic performance, so so much more efficient for syncing | large libraries b/w machines. Owncloud/Nextcloud was a pig for | my purposes, it seemed unable to sync libraries w/ large number | of files (2million+). IIRC Seafile sync client is C under the | hood, and is much more performant than any other sync client | I've tried. OneDrive was completely unable to upload the amt of | data that I needed, and I was tired of manually splitting my | datasets into chunks, only to have to stitch them back together | on the shitty WebUI. Feel free to hit me with any questions if | anyone is thinking of setting up a Seafile instance. I've found | their 'community edition' free release to be more than | sufficient for our team. | frontierkodiak wrote: | Oh yeah, most importantly-- Linux is treated as a 1st class | citizen, the sync clients are equally performant b/w | platforms in my experience. In contrast to Nextcloud, Seafile | is really good at one thing-- file sync&share-- and the Web | UI is intuitive & full-featured for users & admin alike. | pipeline_peak wrote: | I don't think average users even use the Google Drive desktop | client. | titzer wrote: | Just give us a web filesystem already. Stop with these shitty | infantilized GUIs with no hierarchical organization and an | overreliance on search to find things. I have literally hundreds | of thousands to millions of files on my local machines and have | no trouble remembering where I put things. Drive can't seem to | scale past a few dozen before it's confusing, useless, and | apparently lossy. Remember when web servers would serve up the | contents of a directory as a list with hyperlinks on the file | names? That actually _worked_ ffs. I cannot understand how we | could be moving backwards so quickly. | silisili wrote: | I agree with all of your complaints, but will say Gnome | nautilus integration is working pretty well these days, and | allows me to interact with it more like a filesystem than a | shitty webui. | CoastalCoder wrote: | > Just give us a web filesystem already. | | Your level of angst makes me think you believe someone out | there is obligated to do this for you. | | If you believe that, I'm curious why. | mplewis wrote: | Because one would presume that a company building online file | storage as a product would want it to _work?_ | CoastalCoder wrote: | It does work, but apparently not as the OP wishes it did. | | There's a difference between "I wish this product had | feature X" and "I'm upset because I'm _owed_ feature X for | reason Y. " | pessimizer wrote: | > There's a difference between "I wish this product had | feature X" and "I'm upset because I'm owed feature X for | reason Y." | | Then you probably shouldn't have added the _owed_ part. | thrwyoilarticle wrote: | Because it's a paid service. But explaining the emotions | you've projected upon OP isn't useful discussion. | CoastalCoder wrote: | From the OP: | | > Just give us a web filesystem already. Stop with these | shitty infantilized GUIs ... That actually worked ffs. | ... | | I responded by saying: | | > Your level of angst makes me think ... | | I suppose I could be wrong about the OP expressing angst, | but I think it's reasonable inference. | | Also, you wrote: | | > Because it's a paid service. | | I see two problems here: | | (1) I was asking the OP (@titzer) what their reasons | were, not yours. | | (2) Only some people pay for Google Drive. One reason | that I wrote: | | > Your level of angst makes me think you believe someone | out there is obligated to do this for you. | | > | | > If you believe that, I'm curious why. | | was that if the @titzer _was_ paying for Google Drive, I | could see him having a stronger reason for expecting | Google to make the product useful _to him_. But I didn 't | want to assume, which is why I asked. | boredpudding wrote: | Just gonna leave this here: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html | | Please don't go into how another person is feeling, just | read the comment and reply. It will never go well for you | if you try to dismiss somebody's comments by focusing on | how they are feeling instead of their words. | mechanical_bear wrote: | I am paying for Google Drive and I agree with Titzer. | llanowarelves wrote: | It barely works. | | Google Drive deletes files randomly (whether due to | programmatic/storage problems or the documented issue | with the algo not liking things and silently deleting | them). | | Missing block level sync reinforces that it's a toy. What | would you do with 100+gb they tout if not having big | media files? 10,000 spreadsheets (that might still | randomly get deleted)? | | I would be afraid to rely on it for business | encryptluks2 wrote: | I see no proof of it doing this. It sounds like it you | are saving spreadsheets it may have to do with an | extension or third-party app you are using. I've never | had an issue with files randomly getting deleted on | Google Drive and it would be a much bigger issue if this | was common. | ranrotx wrote: | I'd take a file system that can be indexed by my local | operating system (MacOS). | | The last MacOS update broke Spotlight indexing for my Google | Drive folders. Really annoying not being able to use Spotlight | (and by extension Alfred), so the only logical thing to do was | move to iCloud. | | In the process of moving off of Google Drive, I also decided to | move my email to Fastmail and just ditch GSuite (or whatever | they are calling it today) forever. I'll sleep better at night | knowing that Fastmail knows their place and (hopefully) won't | try and force a chat function into my web email client as a | means to build engagement for a product I don't care about. | voltaireodactyl wrote: | Spotlight no longer working with google drive -- for months | now -- has been such a pain in my ass that it's finally | convinced me to shift my entire company off Google Workspace. | At least with Microsoft I can get someone on the phone. | snvzz wrote: | Consider paying for S3. | maccard wrote: | S3 is not a filesystem replacement unfortunately. | kumarsw wrote: | Not a filesystem, but rclone works pretty well | maccard wrote: | rclone also works with Google drive, if that's all you're | after. | Stampo00 wrote: | I agree with you 100%. I just want something that stores files | and works with SFTP and NFS out of the box. I get so annoyed | every time I have to use S3 manually. | | However, there is a post on this site that has become infamous | in which a commenter questions the need for Dropbox when stuff | like SFTP already exists. | Buxato wrote: | Thanks Insync I could survive without their support. | stjohnswarts wrote: | Insync works well but it is pay to play | emilsedgh wrote: | https://community.kde.org/KIO_GDrive | AeroNotix wrote: | GCS works. For my own use it is just much simpler to use GCS | beastman82 wrote: | Right. Don't they have a fuse file system that they actively | maintain? | stjohnswarts wrote: | There is some guy there that maintains an ocaml based fuse | google-drive client. It works okay. I'm not sure if he | volunteers to maintain or is paid. I have moved on to the | isync product but the ocaml opensource project is still there | and maintained last I checked. | layer8 wrote: | I'm glad that Dropbox provides a Linux client, although it is | annoying that it is limited to x86 and ext4. At least the latter | can be worked around with a loopback device. | dehrmann wrote: | Wasn't that around the time Sean Hannity volunteered to get | waterboarded? | shadowgovt wrote: | The Drive API is pretty stable. So given that we're talking about | Linux, the immediate question that comes to my mind is "why | hasn't somebody written it themselves?" | | Perhaps Google sees no benefit in building a service in a space | where users can self serve making it. | [deleted] | jrochkind1 wrote: | The OP no longer seems to succesfuly link to any communication | from Google saying to "hang tight". | ISL wrote: | As the decision seems to be deliberate, I'm interested _why_ | Google has chosen not to implement such a feature. I 'm a paying | GSuite customer. I'd love to be able to NFS-mount portions of my | home directory into Google Drive for access across platforms and | sharing/collaboration with others. | | There's got to be a reason that Google Drive isn't interested in | implementing linux mounts -- I'd be surprised if it is market | share alone. The reason may be interesting/unexpected. | shadowgovt wrote: | It's market share, but I suspect Google's numbers may be skewed | here by their measurement system. They almost certainly have | hard numbers on the percent of users accessing the UI via | various platform configs, and the Linux numbers are low. | Question is if that's because they haven't cracked into the | market because they aren't offering desktop integration. | | The other interesting question is: what are Linux users using | instead? Because that's Google's competition for this software, | which implies how much they could make competing. | frontierkodiak wrote: | Lack of Drive integration was what kicked me to finally self- | host a Seafile instance. | blagie wrote: | My experience is that data-driven companies get into self- | reinforcing circles: | | - Data shows not a lot of customers use Linux | | - Which leads to poor Linux support | | - Which leads to not a lot of customers using Linux | | That's not specific to this either. I've seen companies | discount continents of people due to lack of customers on | those continents, which was often due to inanely easy-to- | solve problems. But if you only have 0.1% of your market in | China, why bother with servers which are inside the Great | Firewall? If 0.1% of your population is Spanish-speaking, why | bother with i18n? | | Data driven companies have an inherent bias towards /current/ | customers, and away from /potential/ customers.... | henriquez wrote: | fulafel wrote: | Would the ChromeOS implementation work if they packaged it, and | if not, why not? | Mikeb85 wrote: | The web app works fine. In fact, it works better than anything | OneDrive related for example (which never seems to sync | properly). | | Chrome and all of Google's services make being in Linux-land way | easier... | sgtnoodle wrote: | I suspect that there's a fundamental conflict in semantics | somewhere between drive and posix filesystems. Any sort of | filesystem wrapper on top of drive would immediately require | making annoying compromises, and the trade-off is convenience | vs. data safety. | | Targeting a locked down OS like Windows or Mac isn't too | difficult, because those compromises can be carefully | implemented in a way that avoids accidental data corruption but | doesn't negatively impact user workflow too much. On a Linux | system, there's hundreds if not thousands of configurations | that folk would expect a filesystem to work in, and so it's a | lot more difficult to strike that balance. | | Years ago, I remember a coworker dragged a directory around on | his MacBook, and it completely flattened the company's entire | drive directory structure. | renewiltord wrote: | There's a pretty good FUSE driver and the web app is fine. Never | felt the need for a Linux client for this service. Two decades of | Linux use and the thing that has changed everything has been the | arrival of electron which has made practically everything cross- | platform. | jokethrowaway wrote: | If something uses electron, I'll look for a native alternative. | | Ripcord doesn't have the best UI and I can't open Teams calls | or even links that are too long (Slack broke their API at some | point) but at least it's not wasting my ram and it's responds | quickly. The rare times I have to open Slack on the web I sigh | and wait 2 minutes for the app to load. | | I automated Prituln VPN via bash just not to have to deal with | another Electron client for a damn popup on my tray bar. | assbuttbuttass wrote: | There's always the excellent unofficial google-drive-ocamlfuse | which uses FUSE to mount Google drive to a local directory. | | https://github.com/astrada/google-drive-ocamlfuse | robertlagrant wrote: | Don't worry - Google Drive does support Linux. Just only on for | the server, not the client :D | dijit wrote: | Wait, doesn't this work? I had a weird experience where pop_OS! | automatically mapped my google drive to nautilus once I had | logged in. | | I'm sure that it's not native, but what features would I be | missing? I was very pleasantly surprised when it just kinda | worked. | Kye wrote: | That support comes from Gnome Online Accounts. | | https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/GnomeOnlineAccounts/Provider... | | Last time I tried it, that only supported the virtual drive | thing, so no actual files locally. | ggambetta wrote: | I've been using Insync for a few years now, works flawlessly. | lovelearning wrote: | What's it supposed to do? Aren't "rclone mount" and the OS file | manager sufficient? | ncphil wrote: | ... exactly what I was thinking. Discovering rclone mount | finally let me abandon the file sync paradigm and return to my | workflows of yesteryear when NFS was still the dominant file | sharing system on Unix. | kkfx wrote: | GNU/Linux users are mostly a bit tech-savvy users, big of IT like | dumb users, they are easy to profit from, very moderately tech- | savvy ones are just needed to pull more people in so offering a | bit of services with a good enough quality and something to make | the experience nice enough for a tech-savvy user (like YT or | Google Search with a certain set of extensions to cut ads etc) is | enough to have thous users recommend those services to their less | tech savvy friends and the world of mouth do the magic. More than | that might be even counter-productive if show a real tangible far | lower quality to the aforementioned users like most single- | company show software are: crappy and outdated. | | Alphabet do want data from the masses, not much from a small | cohort of smart users. Invest for them is not interesting. | jeffbee wrote: | Google Drive does support Linux with the completely open source | DriveFS and supporting userspace services like Seneschal in the | ChromiumOS project. People who claim otherwise don't believe in | actual open source software development, they just want a | convenient quasi-commercial software package that doesn't cost | them anything. | lawl wrote: | > they just want a convenient quasi-commercial software package | that doesn't cost them anything. | | Wouldn't I be paying for gdrive and thus expect to get working | software? The free tier isn't enough for me and I would have | paid if they had a linux client. | | Its okay if they don't think linux is worth it, but your | argument that i should pay for the software again seems really | weird to me. | stephbu wrote: | It feels like Google's attention span, leadership longevity, and | product development patience is roughly 3 years. Any product that | survives longer than that probably has transcended beyond being a | "pet project/toy" into a PR-problem or revenue-stream significant | enough that it takes on a life of it's own. As management turns | over, that lease on life is renewed... | | https://killedbygoogle.com/ | | While this fosters new ideas and opportunities, that conversion | into long-term direction and execution can be pretty rough. | fswd wrote: | You nailed it. Every 3 years google renames and rebadges their | chat system. I don't even know what to call it anymore. | samizdis wrote: | I've posted this link before in comments, but for anyone | who's not read this arstechnica piece it is well worth it: | | _A decade and a half of instability: The history of Google | messaging apps_ | | https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/08/a-decade-and-a- | half-... | easrng wrote: | There's Google Chat, which is really made for companies but | available on normal accounts too, and Google Messages, their | SMS/MMS/RCS app for Android, which requires that you have an | Android phone and a phone plan. | Andrew_nenakhov wrote: | Also Hangouts, Meet, Duo, Allo, Spaces. I don't even know | if all of them are alive now, and I don't care enough to | check. | lyton wrote: | I used Allo for some time. It's long gone now. | hda111 wrote: | To be even more confusing, it's also possible to chat and | video conference with the Gmail app. But maybe this | changes tomorrow who knows? | DangitBobby wrote: | They removed the ability to install the dedicated chat | app and moved it all into the Gmail app. Infuriating. Oh, | and it opens all links on the built-in chrome browser | instead of respecting your default browser settings. | There is no option to change the behavior. | zeusk wrote: | I'm pretty sure there was a Google+ chat, and who | remembers Google Talk? | joeframbach wrote: | And Wave, whatever that was? | seizethegdgap wrote: | Not to be confused with Chat, which is inside the Google | Messages app, which _is_ RCS. | sbrother wrote: | 3 years is roughly the average time it takes to get promoted at | Google. | enduroman wrote: | Or the time someone leaves and goes to another job. | llaolleh wrote: | "Show me the incentives and I will show you the outcome." - | Charlie Munger | password4321 wrote: | No mention of https://rclone.org/drive yet in case anyone is | unaware. | | I don't see how 1st party could do any better than the handful of | 3rd party options. | noasaservice wrote: | Those were the quaint times when we still believed that Google | was awesome and cool, and doing amazing things. | | Now, it's a "our project is already dead", automated banning | hellscape, where the only assistance is from other yet-to-be-AI- | killed fellow user attempt to barely help. Or gods forbid, find | someone here for a "social media escalation". | | I used to care. I gave up caring WRT google ages ago. They are | not worth the trouble. | meibo wrote: | If there was one, people wouldn't use it. It's so well supported | by open source software like rclone and insync, I feel like it | actually works better than it does on my windows machine. | Flimm wrote: | Insync is not open source. | midislack wrote: | Over ten years ago it was already obvious that Google wasn't a | reliable or useful company. You're gonna be waiting a LOOOONG | time. | munchler wrote: | Link to the Google product forum on the target page is broken, so | this is not informative at all. | politelemon wrote: | Yeah, looks like they broke the groups page, which was | 'migrated' from an original Plus page at | https://plus.google.com/u/0/+ChadMcCullough/posts/SxDNKR7ehS... | charcircuit wrote: | Yeah, I'm confused why no one else is discussing this. Who even | said to hang tight? Was it someone on a Drive team? Was it a | trusted community member? Was it just a optimistic Linux | fanatic? | | There is missing context. | seanwilson wrote: | Do Google use Google Drive on Linux internally? Isn't Linux used | a lot there? | pedro2 wrote: | They can mount GDriveFS internally as NFS, I think | throwaway787544 wrote: | Worth noting that it's not actually "Google" that said to "hang | tight". An entire brand does not make a decision like whether to | support Linux. It's a two-pizza team with a shitty budget and a | remit to just keep the damn thing from going down and working out | all the bugs with basic features like moving a file to a new | folder in a weird drop-down. | | I'm sure the team would like to support Linux, if they had a | bigger budget, if they could get out from all of their tech debt, | if they had one or two specialized engineers added to their team. | But the giant corporate behemoth isn't even remotely aware of | those problems, nor will it care. There would have to be a clear | case that adding a Linux client would create real business value. | But considering how small Linux users probably are, and without | an additional revenue stream to offset the cost of development, | it's a non-starter. | stefan_ wrote: | The thinking was probably more along the lines of "no one ever | got promoted for filling out the basic feature set of a file | share me too service" and that promotion is what's standing | between them and an extra 9000 pizzas a year worth of salary. | With a bonus hint of "nobody cares what somebody promised that | left the team a year ago after a year of working on it". | jurschreuder wrote: | Though Linux might be a small platform it's the only one that | really matters. | shadowgovt wrote: | It apparently does not, since lack of Linux support hasn't | killed the product. | abeppu wrote: | I get what you're saying, but: | | - The specific actions of a company will _always_ come from a | specific subset of people who are interacting with and | sometimes constrained by the broader organization. Should this | mean that we can never talk coherently about the actions or | statements of a company? | | - Isn't the company overall responsible for creating the | organizational constraints and obstacles? Why is that team that | size? Why is that their remit, and how has it changed since | _someone_ decided to say "hang tight"? Why do they have the | staff they have? | georgebarnett wrote: | The team who made the post were representing Google, therefor | the company made the post. | | To propose otherwise implies that all similar | actions/statements made in a similar way are not made by the | company, which is both ludicrous and also causes Google to not | exist. | karaterobot wrote: | I get what you're saying, but ultimately it is an issue of | priority. Google has the money, they just don't choose to spend | it on supporting Google Drive on Linux, even after saying they | would. So, supporting Linux is by definition a lower priority | than anything that did pass the bar for resource allocation in | the last ten years. | | You're right about the motivations: they must not view it as | creating real business value, since that's how these decisions | get made. | | My only point here is that it IS a choice someone in an office | is making: it's not worth it to support Drive on Linux. They do | know about it, because it was on their radar 10 years ago. | Somebody took it off their radar. | hobo_mark wrote: | I don't know how many M$/yr Google engineers cost, but there is | at least one small software company out there (InSync) that | built a multiplatform Google Drive client which, personally, | has been working great for years, even on Linux (I'm just a | user), for likely less than that. | morganf wrote: | I love Insync! Very underrated and I wish more people knew | about it!! | layer8 wrote: | It seems that headless use (NAS, VPS) requires a | subscription, unfortunately. | anonymoushn wrote: | Maybe they could ship a linux app instead of deprecating and | replacing the mac app next time :) | thecrumb wrote: | Meh. Google. Google really hasn't come out with anything | innovative in quite awhile, while killing once innovative | projects. | kornhole wrote: | I connected my Linux systems to my Nextcloud server, and then I | connected my Gdrive as external storage in Nextcloud. When I | turned on server side encryption in Nextcloud it also encrypted | my connected storage of Gdrive. So I accomplished both Gdrive | integration as well as file encryption at the same time. | politelemon wrote: | > I connected my Gdrive as external storage in Nextcloud. | | This bit sounds interesting, could you explain it a little | more, how you managed it? | paisawalla wrote: | Does this mean you're storing a backup of your NextCloud as a | large encrypted blob in your gdrive? | dang wrote: | Related | | _How long since Google said a Google Drive Linux client is | coming?_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24183399 - Aug | 2020 (109 comments) | | _How long since Google said a Google Drive Linux client is | coming?_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9434643 - April | 2015 (59 comments) ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-04-24 23:00 UTC)