On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 02:04:36PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Danny Braniss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>I'd really like to see this in 6-STABLE. > > >just a 'me too'. I've been running with the patch(under 6.1) and it's > >definitely > >better than the panics with the unpatched version. in other words, > >IMHO, it does not break anything, and it actualy fixes somethings. > > Compare the mount options the current implementation and the completely > rewritten implementation of unionfs is able to understand. There is a > difference. Since it would break a documented interface, we can't MFC it. > Except maybe you can prove that the option in question doesn't work at all, > and therefore isn't used anywhere. Then we could MFC it, since we wouldn't > break something for someone.
IMO there's absolutely no barrier to getting this one day merged to 6.x, since unionfs is documented to not work in any FreeBSD release since 2.x or earlier. Kris
pgpPeqx9rcQ52.pgp
Description: PGP signature
