Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 06 Mar 2005 11:39:21 +0300
From:      Denis Shaposhnikov <dsh@vneva.link.ru.vlink.ru>
To:        Mathieu Arnold <mat@mat.cc>
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: unionfs 5.4
Message-ID:  <87k6oluq12.fsf@neva.vlink.ru>
In-Reply-To: <1DE178D508C1D70D1B5F9E87@cc-171.int.t-online.fr> (Mathieu Arnold's message of "Sun, 06 Mar 2005 09:36:57 %2B0100")
References:  <87is46kzk1.fsf@neva.vlink.ru> <41C26F23F7DF023CB3DF35C5@cc-171.int.t-online.fr> <87sm3ajj8s.fsf@neva.vlink.ru> <20050305151903.GC26240@hub.freebsd.org> <87mzth18e2.fsf@neva.vlink.ru> <1DE178D508C1D70D1B5F9E87@cc-171.int.t-online.fr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> "Mathieu" == Mathieu Arnold <mat@mat.cc> writes:

 Mathieu> Well, nullfs and unionfs have the same BUGS section :-)
 Mathieu> OTOH, nullfs has never panic'ed me, whereas unionfs has.

Possible, but I can't use it for jail's system because it very slow.

-- 
DSS5-RIPE DSS-RIPN 2:550/5068@fidonet 2:550/5069@fidonet
mailto:dsh@vlink.ru http://neva.vlink.ru/~dsh/



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87k6oluq12.fsf>