Hello Nokan, Nokan Emiro: > I know people usually want to avoid copy-ups, but in my case > exactly this is what I need to enforce. [<OFF>Why? Because the > upper branch is faster to read, and the original branch can be > removed in special cases, and it turns out that I need to > run a binary from the lower (read-only) branch even if the lower > branch is currently unavailable. This is a very difficult story.</OFF>] > > Now I use a simple `/usr/bin/touch "/binary/file.to.raise"` command > to do this, but I'm unsure if this is the best and preferred way to > achieve that effect, or this stuff will work in the future. Once a > rainy morning aufs will recognize that the two files are the same > (except the timestamps on them) and will not copy it up for me...
Essentially your method is correct and I don't have a plan to violate this in the future. "touch -a /your/file" may be better since it doesn't modify the timestamp (mtime). But you might misunderstand something. "aufs will recognize that the two files are the same and will not copy it up" seems strange. When the file exists in the upper writable branch fs, aufs never copy it up, regardless they are same or different. Anyway, in rainy season I have a headache. J. R. Okajima ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time, vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
