2011/6/2 Jordi Pujol <[email protected]>: > A Dimecres, 1 de juny de 2011 21:34:16, vàreu escriure: >> I guess the order will be a bit backwards for overlayfs. aufs allows >> to take N ro filesystems and merge them and put a readwrite filesystem >> on top (eg. tmpfs/A/B/C). You should be able to do tmpfs/A and >> (tmpfs/A)/B and ((tmpfs/A)/B)/C with overlayfs without copying >> anything anywhere but I am not sure how the resulting filesystem >> compares to what you would get by combining these with aufs. > > have you tried your proposal ? > from my point of view, it will not work because overlayfs locks inodes in some > of his functions, therefore if a mount of overlayfs has an inode locked then > another overlayfs mount will be waiting for the same inode but it can not be > available until the current function had finished, the kernel wll detect this > uncoherent situation and print a dump. >
I have not tried this. However, if overlayfs cannot handle mounting overlayfs on overlayfs then it is quite fishy. Thanks Michal -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
