On Thu, 2006-09-21 at 21:26 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
David Zeuthen (davidz(a)redhat.com) said:
> Right. My understanding is that the controversial part of unionfs is the
> ability to join multiple writable file systems into a single tree. Is
> this correct?
Just found the page here,
http://www.am-utils.org/project-unionfs.html
And yes, it appears it's designed to do a lot of things instead of just
doing one thing really well.
Well, in my experience, all I tried was one readable + one writable,
and
*that* blew up. So, my objection was that the basic case failed.
I'm more curious how hard it can be given the assumptions I listed in my
other mail. Then again, I'm not a kernel hacker and got too much on my
plate already :-)
David