lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Status of union-mount?
    Date
    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


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-03-22 03:21    [W:3.172 / U:22.100 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site