Hello Raphael,
On Wednesday 07 January 2009 02:07:08 Raphael Geissert wrote:
> Package: unionfs-fuse
> Version: 0.21-2
>
> Hi,
>
> Trying out unionfs-fuse to determine whether it is better than funionfs or
> not I noticed that even when a directory is marked as RO, it is not
I'm very glad you are testing unionfs-fuse and reporting bugs :)
> respected. Example:
>
> $ mkdir -p {{local,remote}/,}test
> $ /usr/sbin/unionfs-fuse remote/test=RO:local/test=RW test
> $ cat /dev/null > test/foo
> $ ls local/test
> $ ls remote/test
> foo
>
> If I change the order of the arguments so that local comes before remote it
> is "respected" (in the sense that the file is written under local, and not
> under remote; but I suspect that given the required circumstances the bug
> would show up in that case as well).
Hmm, I'm afraid though, this is more a missing feature. Everything I did for
RO/RW branches I did to properly support copy-on-write. And actually I thing
unionfs-fuse is not much of use without cow. However, Radek, the inital
developer wanted to have cow as an option and so cow is disabled by default.
So please give the options "-ocow,allow_other,use_ino,nonempty" to get the
correct behaviour.
Ah and if possible also "-o noinitgroups". The next release will use kernel
permissions and so "-o noinitgroups" won't be required any more (my branch is
here: http://podgorny.cz/~bernd/hg/hgwebdir.cgi/radek-trunk-bernd-merge).
As soon as I have some time, I will see what I can do for RW/RO without cow.
Cheers,
Bernd
--
Bernd Schubert
Q-Leap Networks GmbH
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
