Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
I was helping someone troubleshoot why some programs did not work on files on Samba shares. It is not intuitive that while many gvfs-aware programs will work transparently, non-gvfs-aware programs will simply not work. Not sure if it's Nautilus who should depend on gvfs-fuse, though, or maybe it should be added to the gnome-desktop group or what. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Browse to a Samba share using Nautilus 2. Use a gvfs-aware program to access a file on the Samba share 3. Use a non-gvfs-aware program to do the same. Actual Results: The non-gvfs-aware program fails, without any indication as to why. Expected Results: Users can use files on GVFS without knowing that this requires gvfs-fuse.
This component is maintained by the GNOME project. Issues with it should be reported directly to GNOME at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/. This issue should only be kept open if it: 1. Relates to Fedora packaging or integration with other Fedora components 2. Is required for Fedora release processes, such as blocker bugs and freeze exceptions If this issue isn't needed for either of these two reasons, please: * create an issue with GNOME * add a link to the GNOME issue here * close this issue as CLOSED/UPSTREAM Thank you!
I see that gvfs-fuse is already part of the budgie-desktop, critical-path-gnome, gnome-desktop and mate-desktop groups in fedora-comps: https://pagure.io/fedora-comps Of those gnome-desktop is part of workstation-product-environment, and it's present on both my Fedora Silverblue and Workstation machines. So, I am a bit surprised that you don't have it. I see that nemo and totem have Requires on gvfs-fuse: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nemo https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/totem ... and nautilus used to do the same until 16 years ago (!): https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nautilus/c/82b6076798be058a So, I guess there's no harm in adding a 'Requires: gvfs-fuse' in nautilus.
I would suggest to use just 'Recommends'.
(In reply to Ondrej Holy from comment #3) > I would suggest to use just 'Recommends'. Okay, done! Thanks for taking a look, Ondro!
FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9 (nautilus-49.1-5.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9
FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-911a7393b9 (nautilus-49.1-5.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-a28919967e (nautilus-48.5-4.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-a28919967e
FEDORA-2025-a28919967e has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-a28919967e` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-a28919967e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-a28919967e (nautilus-48.5-4.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.