Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:24:17 -0500 From: Lou Kamenov <loukamenov@gmail.com> To: "Michael W. Lucas" <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org> Cc: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> Subject: Re: the current status of nullfs, unionfs Message-ID: <76f962c6050310092461fc850@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20050310141910.GA72868@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> References: <200503091838.06322.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU> <20050310113843.GJ34822@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050310141910.GA72868@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 09:19:10 -0500, Michael W. Lucas <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:38:43PM +0100, Jeremie Le Hen wrote: > But the mere existence of even a basic regression test would be a > start and would encourage people to not hose things further. [..] > Folks, don't let the fact that you're not a guru stop you from taking > a kiddie step and submitting a basic test! [..] I do use unionfs on daily basis. Mostly to union $home/bin directories and such. For the last 1.5y I had it crash only 2 times. Of course trying to unmount /bin will turn into hell. I've used it successfully with pdumpfs from ports to restore old filespace view. I surely think that a stable unionfs will be a good thing (tm). Erez's unionfs has the same problem, the case there is that you wont be able to unmount it at all. (At least last time I tried with 1.0.3) Problem or not it could be easily solved with simple heuristics. Building a filespace with unioning shouldnt really be that hard. best, l
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?76f962c6050310092461fc850>