From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 5 00:45:42 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8951D16A41F for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:45:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from hub.org (hub.org [200.46.204.220]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E016443D68 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:45:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scrappy@hub.org) Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DDF964BE53 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:45:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from hub.org ([200.46.204.220]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 39082-05 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2005 00:45:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ganymede.hub.org (blk-222-82-85.eastlink.ca [24.222.82.85]) by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 690C964BC2D for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:45:34 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9DFE73A4DF; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:45:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ganymede.hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0A23A4D8 for ; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:45:38 -0300 (ADT) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 21:45:38 -0300 (ADT) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20051004212421.X1477@ganymede.hub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org Subject: Looking for other UNIONFS users ... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:45:42 -0000 As some of you may know, FreeBSD 6.x's UNIONFS is *seriously* broken due to some major changes to the VFS required for SMP (all good advances, but for those of us using UNIONFS, we're kinda stuck) ... I've been talking to one developer that would be interested in fixing UNIONFS, but do to the # of bugs that existed *before* the VFS changes, the "fix" is going to involve a complete re-write, instead of just adding more bandaids and patches. So, my first question is how many ppl are out there that are using UNIONFS and would be interested in co-funding a rewrite of it so that its fixed "once and for all"? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664