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.
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.