![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Adrian Ulrich wrote: >>so all we have left is the issue of whether using /meta costs us >>performance, or whether breaking POSIX to add a symlink (such as >>foo/...) really gives us that much more usability. > > > IMHO '/meta' isn't such a good idea, because a chrooted application > won't be able to use it. mount --bind. Is there a performance hit for having too many of those? mount --bind /meta/vfs/some/chroot /some/chroot/meta Also, maybe a separately-mounted /meta, maybe with something like '-o root=' I can't think of when you'd have a chrooted application that uses /meta, but wasn't written with /meta in mind, so as to have these mount commands in its init scripts. - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-07-06 21:38 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||