From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar 10 23:31:13 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0051C16A4CE; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:31:13 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from harik.murex.com (mail.murex.com [194.98.239.11])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 697BD43D1F; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:31:12 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com)
Received: from interscan.fr.murex.com (iscan.murex.fr [172.21.17.207] (may be
	forged))	by harik.murex.com with ESMTP id j2ANKTbW018025;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:20:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mxmail.murex.com (interscan.murex.fr [127.0.0.1])
	by interscan.fr.murex.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j2ANeD518554;
	Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:40:13 +0100
Received: from mteterin.us.murex.com ([172.21.130.86]) by mxmail.murex.com
	with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0);	 Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:30:45 +0100
From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>
Organization: Virtual Estates, Inc.
To: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:30:48 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2
References: <200503091838.06322.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>
	<20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200503101830.49047.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Mar 2005 23:30:45.0429 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[2ED4F650:01C525C9]
cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: the current status of nullfs, unionfs
X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Filesystems <freebsd-fs.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-fs>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs>,
	<mailto:freebsd-fs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 23:31:13 -0000

> Nullfs works better than unionfs.  Unionfs worked well in 4.X.
> > What about the `union' option to regular mounts? Is that safe to use?
[...]
> Last I checked, it [mount -ounion -mi] was very broken, but I'm not sure.

BTW, how is unionfs different from nullfs with the union option?

	mount -t nullfs -ounion /a /b
vs.
	mount -t unionfs /a /b

? Thanks!

	-mi