On Thursday, January 22 2009, Daire Byrne said: > ----- "Jeremy Katz" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Not usefully -- you can string together some 'dm table' commands and > > get the number of blocks used but it requires being root and also had > > some oddities. > > > > My kingdom for an upstreamable unionfs :/ > > We use "aufs" to union a COW filesystem for our custom "Live" system. It does > seem a little odd that many of the other distros now use a union filesystem > approach to LiveCDs and NFS read-only roots but Fedora has for the time being > stayed away from it. It's not like there isn't lots of custom stuff being put > into fedora/redhat kernels that isn't yet upstream. In fact there was a > discussion about getting UnionFS upstream recently on the kernel list....
A discussion that went nowhere fast. Just like every previous discussion of unionfs. And actually, we're _very_ resistent to adding not-upstreamed stuff into the Fedora kernels. Things that are in an appropriate staging tree? Yeah. But unionfs isn't even there > Saying all this the dm-snapshot approach will be more efficient space wise as > it works with blocks instead of whole files. But since it works on blocks, you have no way at all to ever reasonably pull out your changes and apply them for a new image and a lot of other things Jeremy -- Fedora-livecd-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-livecd-list
