Re: aufs + glusterfs = File too large on "special" files

On Thu October 4 2012, you wrote: > Hi Mike, > > > > On 03.10.2012 21:56, Michael S. Zick wrote: > > > > Is this the same problem you (well, a person with the same name) > > reported on the Linux-VServer list, using the Linux-VServer > > patche

Re: aufs + glusterfs = File too large on "special" files

On Wed October 3 2012, Oliver Welter wrote: > Hi, > > I am running aufs now for a certain while to create a root-fs for > virtual servers (linux-vserver). I am currently using a drbd-partition > for the read-write part of aufs, which is working fine. > > I want to replace drbd with glusterfs, but

Re: Can I simply ignore aufs-util in small systems?

On Sat June 16 2012, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Hello Guan, > > Guan Xin: > > Can there be any damage if I don't install aufs-util at all? > > Because saving every little bit of memory is very helpful. > Specify: noplink in the mount command and you will still have limited usability

Re: Update script bldchraufs - Build a chroot environment based on AUFS

On Thu March 22 2012, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Robert Wotzlaw: > >to locate the reason of the AUFS kernel message. In my opinion, I can > >live with this message and if I see it right, the message doesn't > >point on an error, an error that can harm the file system and it

Re: Update script bldchraufs - Build a chroot environment based on AUFS

On Sat March 17 2012, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Robert Wotzlaw: > >The solution is the change of the uid, guid and perm of the > >directories /tmp/jailcache.rw.usrlocal and > >/tmp/jailcache.ro.usrlocal, if I see it the right way. > > I think you are right. > > > >[

Re: 2.6.39 Debian Kernel Sources: Problems with NFS

/proc/filesystems. So I recompiled the kernel with = > > aufs inside ... but now, I get a kernel panic ... :-/ . I don't think at = > > the moment, it has something todo with aufs itself. > > While I don't know your environment, particluraly your initramfs, > I

Re: Overriding permissions on lower branch

On Mon January 16 2012, Tim Watts wrote: > On 16/01/12 18:53, Michael S. Zick wrote: > > On Mon January 16 2012, Tim Watts wrote: > > > > The easy answer: > > Change the file permissions of the files in the (RO) branch. > > > > Hi Mike, > > Ok, tha

Re: Overriding permissions on lower branch

On Mon January 16 2012, Tim Watts wrote: > Hi, > > Might be a dumbo question, but I cannot see the answer in man mount.aufs > or google... > > If I have 2 branches, br1 (RW) and br2(RO) layers with aufs, it seems > that users cannot write to parts of the merged tree where they do not > have wr

Maximum layer query

JRO, group - Is there a way to determine the maximum number of layers a auFS enabled kernel was built with? Such as: Is it exposed in /sys/fs/aufs or somewhere? Mike -- Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box,

Re: [PATCH] aufs: Do not refer to AUFS_NAME in pr_fmt

On Sun January 1 2012, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Mon, 2012-01-02 at 11:58 +0900, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Thorsten Glaser: > > > >It introduces a new separated file include/linux/aufs_name.h. > > > > > > Isn=E2=80=99t that a bit overkill? > > > > Hmm, I may have to agree with that. >

Re: auFS and ACL

On Fri December 30 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > I forgot writing a few things. > > - Are you heroicglaedr@... himself or his co-worker? > - the aufs module in Debian Squeeze is too old. additionally it is out > of my control, unknown version for me. in other words, if aufs > s

Re: Mount return values are wrong in the new aufs mount location

On Wed December 14 2011, Vasanth Ragavendran wrote: > > > > > > > > Which looks exactly as expected from the previous condition > > you listed before the move. > > > > What do you want different about it? > > I think I have stumbled onto a similar situation that does not involve auFS nor either of

au-chroot example, part-2

JRO, group; The second part of the au-chroot example is up. A quick link for your browser: http://hg.minimodding.com/repos/aufs/auroot.hg/raw-file/94a98b26fd87/au-root-part-2.html Some corrections have been made to the first part. A quick link for your browser: http://hg.minimodding.com/repos/a

Re: auFS/chroot example(s)

On Fri December 16 2011, Klaus Knopper wrote: > Hello Mike, > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 05:42:29AM -0600, Michael S. Zick wrote: > > On Thu December 15 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > > > > > "Michael S. Zick": > > > > @JRO -

Re: auFS/chroot example(s)

On Thu December 15 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > @JRO - I embedded the css into the html file, so all you have > > to do (if you want to) is save the "raw" html file, then push > > it to your auFS website with a

auFS/chroot example(s)

Group, Example(s) getting to big to post on the list, so they are now on-line at: http://hg.minimodding.com/repos/aufs/auroot.hg/ (summary) (a public repository, I.E: hg clone gets you everything.) OR Clicking either of the 'files' notations gets you the list. Currently, a choice of one. So

Re: au-chroot example, v2

On Thu December 15 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > A longer example describing a much better, > > general purpose, au/chroot setup. > ::: > > Once you read/work through the example, you will see > > how to make

Re: Mount return values are wrong in the new aufs mount location

On Wed December 14 2011, Vasanth Ragavendran wrote: > > > > > > > > So I am saying "Try moving jffs2 and sqfsh before switch_root", not only > > /tmp. > > You may need to change their mount-points. For example, > > # mkdir /jffs2 /sqfsh /tmp > > # mount ... /tmp > > # mount ... /jffs2 > > # mount .

Re: Mount return values are wrong in the new aufs mount location

On Tue December 13 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Vasanth Ragavendran: > > > Oh then i was wrong in assuming that the old values shouldn't be displayed > > after doing a switch_root! :( i'm so sorry. however if i do a df -h in the > > I hope you would understand that your /proc/moun

Re: Mount return values are wrong in the new aufs mount location

On Tue December 13 2011, Vasanth Ragavendran wrote: > Hi > > If I introduce ${HOSTCC} into Makefile in aufs-util (and aufs2-util) for > > compileing c2sh, c2tmac and ver (probably), then will the problem solved? > > How do you think? > > > > I am considering a new ioctl to get the aufs version dyn

au-chroot example, v2

JRO, group; A longer example describing a much better, general purpose, au/chroot setup. The example was done while running a LiveCD Linux distribution. Details in the example. If choosing to use the same distribution: http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html The version used in the Exampl

Re: New au-chroot example

ing it is garbage. Will turn out a corrected document, in a usable format, later today. Thanks to drawing my attention to the problems. Mike > > > Quoting "Michael S. Zick" : > > > On Sun December 11 2011, dan...@zoltak.com wrote: > >> Hi Michael, >

Re: New au-chroot example

course, I spotted typo's the moment I hit "send" but I will fix those (later). Mike > Cheers, > > Dan > > Quoting "Michael S. Zick" : > > > JRO, group; > > > > Attached is what I propose as a new example > > of using auFS over

New au-chroot example

JRO, group; Attached is what I propose as a new example of using auFS over a chroot base for the samples directory. This one is written in tutorial style, rather than the expert-to-expert style found elsewhere. Comments welcome, Mike auroot.txt.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data -

aufs3-linux build warning

JRO, I don't know what to do about this one: In file included from /auspace/auroot/aufs/aufs3-linux.git/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h:573:0, from include/linux/uaccess.h:5, from include/linux/highmem.h:7, from include/linux/pagemap.h:10,

Re: auFS 3.0 Problems

On Fri December 9 2011, Michael S. Zick wrote: > JRO, > > Several problems here with auFS on a 3.0.4 kernel. > > All I can say about the first two is they aren't > expected based on the on-line man.html. > > root:~# cat /sys/module/aufs/version > 3.0-201

auFS 3.0 Problems

JRO, Several problems here with auFS on a 3.0.4 kernel. All I can say about the first two is they aren't expected based on the on-line man.html. root:~# cat /sys/module/aufs/version 3.0-20110815 root:~# uname -a Linux Microknoppix 3.0.4 #12 SMP PREEMPT Thu Sep 8 05:27:05 CEST 2011 i686 GNU/Linu

Re: aufs2 and aufs3 GIT release

On Sun December 4 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > No aufs changes. > Just updating aufs3.x-rcN to follow the mainline, linux-3.2.0-rc4. > Perfect timing, I can start my week (Monday morning here) with a "git pull". - - - - Would you consider a git-patch against aufs-utils to conver

Re: aufs as lifetime enhancer?! [Re: Squeeze on USB]

On Wed November 30 2011, Klaus Knopper wrote: > Also, flash media ages. Manufacturers only guarantee cells to hold the > information up to 10 years, so, flash is probably not good for long term > storage. Well... Similar problem for magnetical or optical storage, > which make it up to 50 years only

Re: aufs as lifetime enhancer?! [Re: Squeeze on USB]

On Tue November 29 2011, tovis wrote: > > On Tue November 29 2011, Klaus Knopper wrote: > >> -Klaus Knopper > >> PS: Now this got somewhat lengthy, sorry. I may reuse this explanation for > >> an article later. > >> > I haven't seen this mail!? > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg

Re: aufs as lifetime enhancer?! [Re: Squeeze on USB]

On Tue November 29 2011, Klaus Knopper wrote: > -Klaus Knopper > PS: Now this got somewhat lengthy, sorry. I may reuse this explanation for > an article later. > It reads well just as it is. But if you really feel the urge to write a longer article... ;-) Linux specific, any degree of leveling

Re: 3.1 branch in aufs-util

On Wed November 9 2011, Yioryos Asprobounitis wrote: > > --- On Thu, 11/10/11, sf...@users.sourceforge.net > wrote: > > > From: sf...@users.sourceforge.net > > Subject: Re: 3.1 branch in aufs-util > > To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" > > Cc: aufs-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > Date: Thursday, Nov

Re: No whiteouts?

On Fri October 14 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Ken Trumbo: > > Yes, I know it sounds a bit strange at first. For example, the user can > > modify a file and test the change (say to a file in /etc) and if they don't > > like the change deleting just reverts back to the previous ver

Re: bind-mounts in subdirs for aufs ro branch

On Wed September 7 2011, Sam Liddicott wrote: > I found that I could overlap my cow directories, so I have multiple aufs > mounts, I aufs mount onto a subdirectory of a previous aufs mount, with the > cow being the same subdirectory of the previous cow. > > I get new whitelists, but otherwise I'm

Re: page cache

On Thu March 10 2011, Corin Langosch wrote: > Hi, > > I love aufs but wonder if it's kernel page cache friendly. > > In my setup I have a shared folder with lot's of tools, libs, etc. > installed. I now mount this read-only to several locations and start the > tools from there. Does this result

Re: UID/GID support

On Wed February 9 2011, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > For that use case, jro's suggestion of a custom, fuse based, file system la= > > yer > > that translates the current-user-specfic section of the master file's ACLs &

Re: UID/GID support

On Tue February 8 2011, Jeff Hanson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Michael S. Zick wrote: > > That is a property of "inode file systems" - only one location for > > ownership. > > Symbolic link chain at the directory name level - > > Hard links are

Re: UID/GID support

On Tue February 8 2011, Jeff Hanson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:44 AM,   wrote: > > Users have their own rw branch individually, don't they? > > chwon makes the file copied-up in aufs. So it never affect other users. > > > > Tried that.  The result is that the rw branch ends up with the enti

Re: NFS root + aufs tmpfs + Apache performance problem

On Wed January 26 2011, dan...@zoltak.com wrote: > Quoting sf...@users.sourceforge.net: > > > > If you don't mind, would you clarify your story? > > Other aufs users may meet the similar situation and may think "there > > must exist something bad in aufs" similarly. For such users, what you > > h

Re: Ext3 filesystem errors - orphaned inodes - continued

On Sat November 27 2010, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > sf...@users.sourceforge.net: > > > Do you consider this a bug in aufs, though? > > > > No. > > I think it is a problem of your shutdown script. > > Generally any shutdown script executes > > - kill all processes > > - remount / readon

Re: Can aubrsync move be accumulative

On Wed August 11 2010, T o n g wrote: > On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:25:17 +, T o n g wrote: > > > >> Here I'd suggest you another approach. > > >> > > >> mount -t aufs -o br:rw:ro_mid=ro+wh:ro_bot none u mount -t aufs -o > > >> br:ro_mid:ro_bot none u2 aubrsync move u rw u2 umount u2 > > > > > >

Re: aubrsync need to use real path

On Tue August 10 2010, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > T o n g: > > $ pwd > > /dev/shm/tmp/u > > > > $ /bin/pwd > > /dev/shm/tmp_real/u > > ok. > > > > I think most people would use bash under Linux. > > For intractive shell, I agree with you. > But for non-intractive shell, I am afraid ma

Re: Your AUFS donation will be doubled by Tomas M

On Thu April 15 2010, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Tomas M: > > So I decided to do something to help aufs stay in business: > > When you donate to AUFS, I will double your donation from my pocket. > > Read more here: http://www.slax.org/aufs.php > > AMAZING!! > I have no word to represe

Re: Your AUFS donation will be doubled by Tomas M

On Thu April 15 2010, Tomas M wrote: > Hello all aufs users, > this is Tomas M, the author of Slax and Linux Live scripts. > > I am using AUFS in my open source projects and I need AUFS to > be developed as long as possible. At the same time I realize that > it is very hard task to keep the code u

Re: masking out subdirectories ... is it possible ? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

On Fri January 29 2010, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Hello Alex, > > "Wilkinson, Alex": > > I have created a union mount as such: > > > >#mount -t aufs -o br=/mnt/foo:/mnt/bar none /mnt/aufs > > > > This works perfectly well. However there are a number of directories and > > file

Re: performance of aufs

On Thu December 3 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > There is at least one, low cost (<$100USD) system, also available in Japan, > > that > > makes a good example of such a system: the ASUS O!Play, Media Player. >

Re: performance of aufs

On Wed December 2 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > xavi kpan: > > Dear all: > > > > We use aufs to mount an ro rootfs(/usr/,/lib/...) and a writable layer > > on it. both are ext3. > > The lmbench show that creation of file, deteting of files are only a > > half of the speed o

auFS in embedded systems

Group, Anyone here using auFS with an embedded system? More exactly - I would like to add the patch and tools to the Buildroot, build system - I need some advice on how best to do that. Mike -- Let Crystal Reports handl

Re: Any known issues with this combination?

On Wed November 4 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Hello Kyle, > > Kyle Bader: > > I plan on using 2.6.31.5 vanilla from git, merging it with aufs2-31 and > > applying the grsecurity patch: > ::: > > Are you aware of any incompatibilities? > > As far as I know, there is no such

Re: swapfile on aufs

On Thu July 16 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Kris Warkentin: > > Wow...just answered my own question. Bind mounts are pretty cool. > > Since I leave my ro/rw partitions mounted in my aufs dir, all I needed > > to do was: > > > > mount -o bind /.rw/swapfile /swapfile > > swapon /

Re: GIT Repository broken?

On Tue June 9 2009, Johannes Bauer wrote: > Bruno Cesar Ribas schrieb: > > Strange, I just tested here and everything went Ok. > > Indeed, this is most strange: I tried it on my other computer (Gentoo, > git version 1.6.0.6) and it worked fine. However, on the one I tried > before (Debian Etch, gi

Re: pdflush produces 99% CPU usage with aufs2 on some conditions

On Tue May 19 2009, Alexander Krause wrote: > Hi, > > > Alexander Krause: > > > > What I menat is something like this. > > > > # mkdir /mnt/aufs/overlay > > > > # mount /dev/sdb2 /mnt/aufs/overlay > > > > # while true; do find /mnt/aufs/overlay/ -ls > /dev/null; done & > > > > # seq 100 | while re

Re: Busybox seg fault using aufs

On Thu May 14 2009, Michael S. Zick wrote: > On Thu May 14 2009, Derek Spadaro wrote: > > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:38 PM, wrote: > > > > > > Derek Spadaro: > > >> I was asking around a few weeks back about aufs using uClibc.  I am > > >> still

Re: Busybox seg fault using aufs

On Thu May 14 2009, Derek Spadaro wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:38 PM, wrote: > > > > Derek Spadaro: > >> I was asking around a few weeks back about aufs using uClibc.  I am > >> still wrestling with this issue.  GDB tells me that when this fault > >> occurs uClibc __start is passed a pointe

Re: How to wrtie on sfs with aufs ?

On Thu April 23 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > "J. Bakshi": > > Thanks but please read it. > > > > http://tldp.org/HOWTO/SquashFS-HOWTO/creatingandusing.html > > > > it clearly shows that wiring on Squashfs is possible by unoinfs. If you mean section 4.4 - what it shows clearly i

Re: overlap=exclude

On Mon April 13 2009, Xavier Pijuan wrote: > > >If both of your /tmp/rw and / exist on the same filesystem, then I'd > >recommend you to mount tmpfs to /tmp/rw. Aufs will not complain when two > >filesystems are different. > > > > > >J. R. Okajima > > Thank you! That seems to work. But I still th

Re: overlap=exclude

On Mon April 13 2009, Xavier Pijuan wrote: > > Hello, > I have been trying to use the auroot.sh script to sandbox an application, but > it doesn't seem to work. I have tried to make it manually, but it seems > impossible, because aufs keeps compaining about overlappings. > > The problem is that

Re: poor performance for large directory listing

On Mon April 13 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Jeff Breidenbach$B$5$s(B: > > I spent some time trying to install aufs2 on Ubuntu 8.04, but this is > > getting beyond my skill level. For aufs1, I have been able to use > > Julian's packages and module assistant. > > If Ubuntu 8.04 i

Re: aufs2 Monday GIT release

On Sun April 12 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > The aufs2 GIT trees on http://git.c3sl.ufpr.br/pub/scm are updated. > If I made something wrong about tree management, please let me know. > > News > - support variable vdir, new options rdblk= and rdhash=. > - I have posted aufs patche

Re: Switching from a readonly to readwrite mount

On Thu April 2 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Matthew Harrell: > > I can reproduce it every time on all my systems. I know the ones that > > actually call modprobe manually have the problem (either in a script > > or some other way). I'll have to look for ones that are inserted by

Re: Will aufs2 support ramfs?

On Wed March 11 2009, TualatriX wrote: > J. R. Okajima: > > >One question. > >Are you using initramfs as an aufs writable branch? If so, have you ever > >met the capacity (size limit) problem? > > Yes, as an writeable branch, and I haven't ever meet any capacity problem > yet. > It may have a 5

Re: Will aufs2 support ramfs?

On Wed March 11 2009, Barry Kauler wrote: > I'm another person who has a need for this, for aufs to be able to use > initramfs. > > I would like a variant of Puppy Linux that stays in the initramfs and > is able to build a layer-f.s. with '/' as one branch, and chroot into > it. > Gotcha - "init

Re: Will aufs2 support ramfs?

On Thu March 12 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Tomas M: > > sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > > If you use initramfs as an aufs branch, then you will meet some trouble > > > because initramfs will be freed after boot > > > > Are you sure about that? > > > > I do not unders

Re: Will aufs2 support ramfs?

On Wed March 11 2009, TualatriX wrote: > Hello J. R. Okajima: > > Thanks for your reply! > > Just as you said, my use-case is mounting file system in initramfs. Without > ramfs support I can't mount file system when booting in initramfs. > > I'm thinking whether it is possible to make aufs2 supp

Re: permission in an aufs-mount

On Sun March 8 2009, Peter Hansen wrote: > Hi, > > I've a question about aufs: I want to create a FS-Tree with one rw and > one ro branch (simple setup). Thats not the problem but I want to wrap > all permissions while mount to uid=100 (some_user) and gid=100 > (users). Is there any possibil

Re: aufs mount problem in initrd with CentOS 5.2 ( RHEL 5.2)

On Fri February 6 2009, Nitin Bhardwaj wrote: > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:29 PM, wrote: > > > > > Hello Nitin, > > > > Nitin Bhardwaj: > > > mount -t aufs -o br:/sysroot/bin:/sysroot/.mount/bin=ro none /sysroot/bin > > > mount -t aufs -o br:/sysroot/lib:/sysroot/.mount/lib=ro none /sysroot/lib > >

Re: aufs2-base2-2.6.27.tar.bz2

On Mon February 2 2009, Julian Andres Klode wrote: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 06:05:18PM +0100, Tommy[D] wrote: > > If i see it right, this is now a kernel patch, so distros would have to add > > it to their kernel and > > would have to maintain it here. With the cvs-Version, people could use the

Re: aufs2-base1-2.6.27.tar.bz2

On Tue January 27 2009, sf...@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > > Kernel John: > > There were cases when neither reval nor remount were effective. > > Our development environment is based on often changed branches. There were > > cases, when modification times of files on aufs were not updated after

Re: swap problem

On Tue December 30 2008, Kernel John wrote: > Hello! > > Our situation looks like this: > Whole system (debian dist.) is based on aufs. It's something like Knoppix > > One writable branch located in tmpfs. > About 10 ro branches made of mounted dm devices ( our distro ) > Additional drive where w

Re: Bug with latest version

On Fri November 21 2008, fd wrote: > On Friday 21 November 2008 07:20:36 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > fd: > > > I have recompiled a test kernel, so I have just uploaded the new config / > > > patches that I used. You can also see the output (I redirected the serial > > > to a file with kvm). It has

Re: Bug in i_op.c?

On Tue November 11 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello Elmar, > Thank you for your bug report. > > Unfortunately, aufs_related_infos/proc_mounts in your tar file is > empty. Send me /proc/mounts first please. > > > "Vonlanthen, Elmar": > > copy some files manually from rootfs to the Union,

Re: aufs use-case

On Sun October 26 2008, Bruno Cesar Ribas wrote: > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 01:47:17AM -0700, SEO, Takeshi wrote: > > Hello all. > > Hello There =) > > > > > We're very interested in AUFS and evaluating now. > > Are there any info/pointer about "use-case" of AUFS, non-personal use? > > Well, I c

Re: recent aufs versions and folder inotify events

On Wed October 22 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "James .": > > Behaviour which i dont think is correct: I noticed that the unioned > > filesystem often misses some inotify events (or whatever you would call it) > > when new files are created. I have to "refresh" on my nautilus browser every > >

Re: recent aufs versions and folder inotify events

On Wed October 22 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "James .": > > Behaviour which i dont think is correct: I noticed that the unioned > > filesystem often misses some inotify events (or whatever you would call it) > > when new files are created. I have to "refresh" on my nautilus browser every > >

Re: Please report this application to aufs-users ML:epiphany-browser

On Thu October 2 2008, Chris Fanning wrote: > Hi, > > Just a quick question. > One of the reasons we are using epiphany-browser is because firefox > was mysteriously going zombie. > I have both Debian and Ubuntu systems - both have had a recent update to libc issued - - (no change in kernel, I ma

Re: May I beg you?

On Wed September 24 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > No one should take any offense to such a carefully written request. Can contributors e-mail you directly at the above address? Come on aufs users, let us all scrape together enough coins to keep this project alive. Mike > Hello aufs users

Re: aufs (unionfs) + vserver = kernel ops

On Tue August 19 2008 16:53, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello Oliver, > > Oliver Welter: > > I used the vserver-patch provided with aufs ( I had to change the > > patched file from vfsub.h to vfsub.c ) and compiled it into the kernel > > as told by the README. > > > > I did a simple mount exam

Re: aufs limitations, max number of directories

On Tue August 12 2008 08:31, Markus Gerstner wrote: > Hey again, > > in the past few days, I've been trying hard to find a definite answer as to > what the current limitations of aufs and mount are. > Is there a limitation on how many dirs can be unified at once? > > I did some testing and from

Re: howto make big storage?

On Sun July 27 2008 17:16, Василишин Андрей wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] пишет: > > Hello Andrey, > > > > > >> I am do that I want :) The fist, that I saw it was sendfile on nginx > >> doesn't work. > >> > > > > I guess you forgot applying splice-2.6.23.patch and enabling > > CONFIG_AUF

Re: using uloop in Debian Live

On Thu May 15 2008 07:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Jordi Pujol: > > > > Another thing, > > Attached is my little collaboration to uloop, two little commands to mount = > > and=20 > > umount with easy. > > Thank you. > They must help other people. > I will describe them too. > The uloop ex

Re: problem: Corrupted filesystem

as the problem solved? > > I received only empty messages from [EMAIL PROTECTED], > > so I am unable to track your conversation :( > > Actually I don't know what he did. There is no private conversation > about sqlzma between thanatermesis and me. All I know is the URL he

Re: problem: Corrupted filesystem

On Wed February 20 2008 07:22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Thanatermesis: > > The problem is solved, thanks for all the help > > Glad to hear that. > > > > The real cause was NOT in aufs (or unionfs), but in squashfs, more exactly > > due to the LZMA compression, more information in > > http:/

Splice Vulnerabilities

Does this advisory apply to the use of splice system calls in auFS? Mike - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.

Re: problem moving files between layers

On Wed January 23 2008 20:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > "Dipl.-Ing. Michael Niederle": > > I check all files whether they are opened or not before removing them from > > the > > ramdisk-layer. It seems that I must not remove any file within a directory > > if > > only a single file within t

Re: aufs Monday release

On Sun January 20 2008 23:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Super! Thanks alot for starting to look at 2.6.24-rcX before the stable release. Mike (z) > > o news > - new sample chroot-ed/jail environment useing aufs. > > o bugfix > - bugfix: consolidate make targets for parallel build (make -j3), >

Re: Does not compile with Ubuntu 2.6.24 (works with 2.6.22)

On Fri January 18 2008 00:45, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Michael Haas: > > Just found this: > > http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0710.3/1453.html > > Thanx for your info. > Probably ubuntu people applied this patch for apparmor or something. > I'll wait for the release of linux-2.6

Re: Read only filesystem with aufs

On Thu January 17 2008 06:44, Gabor Laszlo Zsolt wrote: > > - Original Message > From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Gabor Laszlo Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: aufs-users@lists.sourceforge.net > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:20:37 PM > Subject: Re: Read only filesys

Re: lhash patch for 2.6.24-rc7

On Sun January 13 2008 20:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > Which is reasonable, and also the reason I had to post an > > lhash-2.6.24.patch file > > Your patch didn't seem to be delivered to me or ml. > When did you post it

Re: lhash patch for 2.6.24-rc7

On Sun January 13 2008 15:02, Michael Haas wrote: > Hello, > > I'm currently trying to use aufs on a diskless client. Because one of > the branches will be a NFS mount, I need the lhash patch. However, it > does not apply to 2.6.24-rc7 (or Ubuntu's incarnation of 2.6.22 for that > matter). > > He

Re: aufs Monday release

On Thu January 10 2008 00:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > "Michael S. Zick": > > Found it! > > Congratulation. > > > > Which course would you like to see - a simple rename everywhere, > > or major change to look it up in the header file

Re: aufs Monday release

h like) for conditional tests. Mike On Wed January 9 2008 16:30, Michael S. Zick wrote: > On Wed January 9 2008 16:09, Michael S. Zick wrote: > > On Wed January 9 2008 15:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > Hello Michael, > > > > > > "Micha

Re: aufs Monday release

On Wed January 9 2008 16:09, Michael S. Zick wrote: > On Wed January 9 2008 15:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Hello Michael, > > > > "Michael S. Zick": > > > There is no #define TEMPFS_MAGIC in mm/shmem.c of 2.6.24-rc6 > > > The comme

Re: aufs Monday release

On Wed January 9 2008 15:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hello Michael, > > "Michael S. Zick": > > There is no #define TEMPFS_MAGIC in mm/shmem.c of 2.6.24-rc6 > > The comment about it being used by glibc remains, but the define is _gone_. > > I down

CVS-20071216 release and Linux-2.6.24-rc6

On Sun December 16 2007 21:55, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > There is no #define TEMPFS_MAGIC in mm/shmem.c of 2.6.24-rc6 The comment about it being used by glibc remains, but the define is _gone_. Passing -DTEMPFS_MAGIC "defines" the symbol (which is empty of contents); so the conditional test in a