> Thank you for whoever read the posts. > I upgraded and have posted them to LKML and asked their review just now.
Now the discussion on LKML seems to be going the difference between aufs and unionfs. As I wrote, aufs2 is a refined version of aufs1. But several features are dropped. So what is the strongest difference? Some people would say "this feature and that feature". And others would say "the stability". Anything is OK. Anyone, please post your good reason to LKML as a follow-up to this mail (see below). I'd ask your help of all aufs users. But I'd never ask you bad reason. :-) Mark A. Grondona (CC-ed), I remember you reported a bug about memory re-allocation last year, saying it was found by Coverity. I believe it is a good tool. If you have ever tested unionfs by Coverity, won't you post the comparision result to LKML, because I expect it is a good reason of "the quality"? Klaus Knopper (CC-ed), As well as Tomas M (slax.org), you are one of the oldest user of aufs. Won't you post to LKML why you chose aufs instead of unionfs. I expect it is some other good reason of stability, "the popularity" or something. Again, I'd ask your help of all aufs users. J. R. Okajima ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 09:15:48 -0500 From: Theodore Tso <[email protected]> To: Tomas M <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: Re: New filesystem for Linux kernel Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso <[email protected]>, Tomas M <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected] On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Tomas M wrote: > An overview of aufs2 has been submitted to this list. > I noticed zero response at all. Nobody cares? > > I suggest to remove unionfs from Andrew's -mm tree and replace it by aufs2! > Tell me why this should not happen... Um, you need to tell us why aufs2 is better than Unionfs. The burden of proof rests on your shoulders. The code which is displacing existing code needs to give a justification about why it is better than the code which is displacing, not the other way around. > I write this in the hope that a debate will start... As a debate judge might say, you haven't even made your prima facie case yet. - Ted ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
