Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:43 +0300 From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New Server - To 5.x or Not To 5.x Message-ID: <E1DiZOh-0000qm-Kf@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:05:06 -0300 (ADT) .
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>
> I've been running FreeBSD 4.x for eons now, mainly because of the fact
> that she's "known" in our environment ... UNIONFS isn't perfect, but all
> of the obvious/major bugs have been worked out of her, etc ... but, she's
> also a dead branch, so any outstanding bugs, nobody is interested in
> fixing them, let alone having reported ...
>
> I'm just in the process of putting together a new server, and based on
> some stuff I've heard recently concerning work that has been done on
> UNIONFS, I'm tempted to put 5.x onto this new server, to start bringing my
> servers into the 'current age' ...
>
> Is there anyone out there using 5-STABLE and UNIONFS that are happy with
> it, or is it still very problematic?
>
> Again, the key thing right now for me is UNIONFS, so I'm looking mainly
> for feedback from ppl that *are* using it, not just reading the end of the
> man page ...
>
> Thanks ...
im using it, even with 6.0.
im using it for my diskless (about 90% of our freebsd), to mount /etc
kldload unionfs
mount_md 4096 /conf/etc
chmod 755 /conf/etc
mount_unionfs /conf/etc /etc
ls -R /etc > /dev/null
touch /etc/.sentinel
md_created_etc=created
and all is fine.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1DiZOh-0000qm-Kf>