--- On Mon, 12/13/10, Daniel Drake <[email protected]> wrote:
> You can look on lwn.net for articles about unionfs, why its
> so hard
> and why it doesn't work very well yet (and is not yet
> present in
> Linux).
>
> Scott (ex-OLPC, a big contributor to the current /versions
> scheme)
> made some comments on IRC a few months ago that he had
> tried(/deployed?) unionfs for litl (in the style that you
> describe)
> and that he didn't recommend it.
>
> Still, certainly something to keep an eye on for the
> future.
>
I actually tried, and my understanding is that Aufs although the most
feature-full and reliable will never make it into the kernel, with 20.000+
lines of undocumented code that no other than the developer really wants to
look at.
Union suffers from both features and reliability while union-mount is probably
the closest from making it into the kernel, though is still lacking some key
features.
All I can say is that Aufs works pretty nice with the olpc kernels and since we
(still) maintain our own kernel, might not be such a bad option.
Would be interesting to hear which unionfs variant Scott was talking about and
the related problems, so to have a better idea what to look for in the future.
Best
> Daniel
>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
