Francois Goudal: > I have now updated my init script that is responsible for mounting all=20 > the aufs and aufs-related stuff, I do a chmod after I mount the tmpfs to=20 > /ramvar and the problem is now gone.
Glad to hear that! > Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. > Still, I guess, there is still a problem with copyup not being able to=20 > support such a strange case. Should you need me to make some more tests,=20 > let me know and I will of course do it. Thanks but it won't be necessary because I think I can reproduce the problem on my test machine. What I am thinking now is - aufs should respect the native feature (including security) of the branch fs as possible. - as long as the sticky bit is set to the branch, aufs should follow the behaviour of the branch fs (which causes an error in this case). - on the other hand, the copy-up should be done internally and transparently (from the users' view). It means aufs should break the sticky bit protection. - actually the old versions of aufs didn't issue the rename operation as a part of the copy-up and this problem didn't happen ever. Hmm... what should I do... J. R. Okajima ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed leaders in the field. The early access version is available now. Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
