From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 15 15:01:45 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9881E16A41C
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:01:45 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from cs1.cs.huji.ac.il (cs1.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.10])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E73D43D49
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:01:45 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il)
Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32])
	by cs1.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp
	id 1DiZOh-0000qm-Kf; Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:43 +0300
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.0 06/18/2004 with nmh-1.0.4
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 14 Jun 2005 14:05:06 -0300 (ADT) .
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:01:43 +0300
From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il>
Message-ID: <E1DiZOh-0000qm-Kf@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: New Server - To 5.x or Not To 5.x 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 15:01:45 -0000

> 
> 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.