From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 22 19:33:35 2004 Return-Path: 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 A2B6D16A4CE for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:33:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from afields.ca (afields.ca [216.194.67.132]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEC743D1F for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:33:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from afields@afields.ca) Received: from afields.ca (localhost.afields.ca [127.0.0.1]) by afields.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5MJXJXQ026047; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:33:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from afields@afields.ca) Received: (from afields@localhost) by afields.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i5MJXJlq026046; Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:33:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from afields) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:33:19 -0400 From: Allan Fields To: Bjoern Koenig Message-ID: <20040622193319.GD594@afields.ca> References: <20040622120059.1F96F16A4F0@hub.freebsd.org> <20040622130901.7F0A31A3@hoppel.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040622130901.7F0A31A3@hoppel.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: nullfs in 4.10 X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:33:35 -0000 --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 03:09:18PM +0200, Bjoern Koenig wrote: > Hello, >=20 > first of all: >=20 > THIS FILESYSTEM TYPE IS NOT YET FULLY SUPPORTED > (READ: IT DOESN'T WORK) AND USING IT MAY, IN FACT, > DESTROY DATA ON YOUR SYSTEM. USE AT YOUR OWN RISK. > BEWARE OF DOG. SLIPPERY WHEN WET. Right, but that's only the short answer: "it's broken". The more in-depth answer is that while users may want to use them in production now: null and other pseudo file systems may still require some work for prime-time use and it's a valid concern for the platform. Those that raise the point aren't being unreasonable, I'm of the opinion it should be fixed at some point soon. Having said that: As to whether it belongs in -stable now: yes people are warned not to use it, why not just remove it? I think one argument to keep it in is for completeness: nullfs or similar belongs in the base (in BSD systems) and taking it out seems like the wrong answer from a technical standpoint. Also placing code in the corner won't fix it: even if it is made to work under 5, many want to use it in 4 still. ;) > My experience: >=20 > I had much less problems with unionfs -b, even with FreeBSD 4.10, to mount > for example /usr/ports into a jail temporarily. But for everything else y= ou > should never use it. What are some other approaches than overlays for jailed environments? Use NFS instead? > Bjoern --=20 Allan Fields, AFRSL - http://afields.ca 2D4F 6806 D307 0889 6125 C31D F745 0D72 39B4 5541 --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFA2Il+90UNcjm0VUERAkQpAJ0WmRCckabAWPNaUScdImH2HUgdPACaArmP QrgXQQw3rytwujfIMT6sagM= =Pq99 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EuxKj2iCbKjpUGkD--