Ohh, this is truly sad. SSHFS is my preferred to share storage among different PCs. Hopefully someone with enough knowledge will take it over…
SSHFS is by far the easiest and most secure-by-default way I’ve found to mount a remote storage share. I have donated a little bit to this project before; I really hope a stable maintainer can take over because this is a critically useful piece of software!
is it better than samba/nfs?
Better? :)
See it all depends, as @Jeffrey@lemmy.ml mentioned, out of the box you can start easily mounting remote stuff in a secure way. Depending on the latency between the remote location and you, SSHFS might become more resilient than NFS, though in general might be slower (data goes encrypted and encapsulated by default), but still within the same local LAN (not as remote as mounting something from Texas into Panamá for example), I’m more than OK with SSHFS. Cifs or smbfs is something I prefer avoiding unless there’s no option, you need a samba server exposing a “shared” area, and it requires MS-NT configurations for it to work, and managing access control and users is, well, NTish, so to me it’s way simpler to access remote FS through SSH on the remote device I already have SSH access to, and it boils down to NFS vs. SSHFS, and I consider easier, faster and more secure, the SSHFS way.
But “better”, apart from somehow subjective, depends on your taste as well.
