Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Mar 2004 20:47:05 +0800 (WST) | From | Ian Kent <> | Subject | Re: unionfs |
| |
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, [iso-8859-1] Jörn Engel wrote:
> On Mon, 15 March 2004 12:35:25 +0100, Carsten Otte wrote: > > Herbert Poetzl wrote: > > >FWIW, have a look at http://vserver.13thfloor.at/TBVFS > > I do really think this problem needs to be solved a different way: BSD-style > > union mount in VFS, no redirecting filesystem. > > I am planning to work on that during the 2.7. series. I do hope I will be able > > to write code clean enough for inclusion, lets see... > > You could also have some sort of 'hidden symlink', i.e. something that > behaves just like a file but is in fact a link to some other > filesystem. If that other filesystem is not accessable, all > operations return -EIO.
Sounds a bit untidy.
Has anyone checked http://www.filesystems.org/
What do you think?
Ian
- 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/
| |