Messages in this thread | | | From | David Howells <> | Subject | Re: Status of union-mount? | Date | Fri, 22 Mar 2013 01:38:55 +0000 |
| |
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmm, sorry for asking, but when do you plan to offer a "working" > union-mount (u-m)?
It's a maze of twisty locking problems - some of which also apply to things like overlayfs:-(
> What's the status of the user-space tools or are they no more needed?
You need to be able to tell mount(2) that you want a union. This is currently done with a mount flag, but it might be portable to something in the mount option string.
> AFAICS the original authors patched e2fsprogs etc. (see Valerie's old > homepage [1]).
Yeah... I guess fsck programs need to be able to handle whiteout and fallthru directory entries.
> >> Where does the development happen - in [1]? > > > > On a git tree on my PC - which is occasionally mirrored in [1] when I've got > > it working. > > > > Development on your local workstation does not look like you do an > open development.
Excuse me. But it's quite hard to develop this on a remote git tree. Further, I prefer not to push partially working stuff to my git tree, lest someone pull it, try playing with it and have their fs eaten.
If someone wants it, I can mail the partially working stuff to them, but not many people ask.
> So, it's currently only you doing the work on u-m?
Almost entirely, yes.
David
| |