From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Sep 10 4:26:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mail.XtremeDev.com (xtremedev.com [216.241.38.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E33A37B405 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 04:25:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xtremedev.com (xtremedev.com [216.241.38.65]) by mail.XtremeDev.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1005413657 for ; Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:25:52 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 05:25:51 -0600 (MDT) From: FreeBSD To: Subject: mount_nfs reverse stacking? Message-ID: <20010910051958.Y65251-100000@Amber.XtremeDev.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Is it possible to have mount_nfs mount a remote layer _under_ an existing local fs? Ie., I would like a main central server that has /usr/ports exported, and all the workstations mounting that locally but under their actual /usr/ports. So any distfiles actually downloaded are placed on the respective local /usr/ports/distfiles etc, and the temp work dirs are placed locally on each workstation. Currently I'm using a two step process of mounting the server export on the workstations as /usr/rports, then using mount_unionfs with the -b argument on /usr/ports (mount_unionfs -b /usr/rports /usr/ports) to achieve this, but am hoping others have come up with a better way? Is this even possible in mount_nfs given the design of nfs? PS. I would have been happy with the unionfs/nfs take, but I've been having issues with unionfs in -current with some of my test machines as of late (panicking kernels and stuff), that's what really prompted the sending of this email. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message