From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Oct 16 18:27:32 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA21094
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA21089
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:27:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id SAA01297; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:25:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
cc: jehamby@lightside.com, jsigmon@www.hsc.wvu.edu,
        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.2.x release question 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:19:44 PDT."
             <199610170119.SAA04439@phaeton.artisoft.com> 
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:25:54 -0700
Message-ID: <1295.845515554@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > I feel they had a perfectly valid point.
> 
> Let them use union mounts...

I see.  The "let them eat cake" argument, eh?  Well, Marie, we
don't have unionfs and the peasants don't have cake. :-)

					Jordan

P.S. To anyone who nonetheless feels compelled to say "We *do* have
unionfs!  We do!  I saw it in /sys/miscfs/union just the other day!"
let me just clarify that we haven't had anything resembling a working
unionfs for close to 2 years now, and those who were holding their
breath for it died of asphyxiation long ago.