Messages in this thread | | | From | "Joseph Fannin" <> | Date | Sat, 14 Dec 2002 00:57:16 -0500 | Subject | Re: Symlink indirection |
| |
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 05:04:12PM +0000, Andrew Walrond wrote: > Of course; Didn't think of that in this context. > > My application of symlinks involves overlaying several directories onto > another, in an order such that any like named files are overridden in a > defined way. > > I had thought about asking the feasibility of [made up name] > 'transparent bindings' which would have this effect > > Suppose I might as well ask now ;) Any takers?
I don't understand what you are trying to explain. Do you mean a union mount, or a variation thereof?
I thought Al Viro was going to do union mount support for 2.5, but I haven't heard about it in a while. Maybe it went in and no one noticed?
> Pete Zaitcev wrote: > >>Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:48:45 +0000 > >>From: Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> > > > > > >>Sorry for being dense, but what do you mean by 'bindings' ? Hard links? > > > > > >$ man mount > > > > Since Linux 2.4.0 it is possible to remount part of the file > > hierarchy > > somewhere else. The call is > > mount --bind olddir newdir > > After this call the same contents is accessible in two places. > > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
-- Joseph Fannin jhf@rivenstone.net
"That's all I have to say about that." -- Forrest Gump. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |