T o n g:
> Ok, back to ground 0. Please refer to the following previous posts (that
> I gathered from different places):
:::
> | See, all the previous content have gone.
Well, that must be a big problem.
Will you show me your result? Oh, you didn't try it?
I believe that must be a very
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
> > >
> > >
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
> >
> > I am afraid that it won't be accumulative either.
>
>
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 07:51:59 +0900, sfjro 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
I am afraid that it won't be accumulative either. Anyway...
I was trying
T o n g:
> Ok, I just thought it over again and it turns out that I was right.
:::
> Please double check.
I am afraid you are still misunderstanding aubrsync.
As I wrote, the script is for aufs with two branches basically. Since
you have three branches, you need to operate rsync(1) via au
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 21:43:51 +0900, sfjro wrote:
>> it seems to work at the first glance, but it will fail in real
>> world. Because --max-delete=0 completely disable file deletion, if
>> there is any modification to the files in ro_mid branch at the RW
>> level, the script will fail.
>
> Did it
T o n g:
> Ok, it seems to work at the first glance, but it will fail in real world.
> Because --max-delete=0 completely disable file deletion, if there is any
> modification to the files in ro_mid branch at the RW level, the script
> will fail.
Did it really fail on your side?
In the previous
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 10:37:19 +0900, sfjro wrote:
> Here is a simple script and the result. Is this behaviour what you want?
Ok, it seems to work at the first glance, but it will fail in real world.
Because --max-delete=0 completely disable file deletion, if there is any
modification to the file
T o n g:
> >> mount -t aufs -o br:./rw:./ro2=wh:./ro1 none ./u
> >
> > I am afraid this branch permission "=wh" returned an error. Did it
> > really succeed?
>
> It seems to be OK at my side. Here is the full log around the point that
> I did it:
You are right.
I forgot that "every unknown perm
On Sat, 07 Aug 2010 07:33:07 +0900, sfjro wrote:
>> mount -t aufs -o br:./rw:./ro2=wh:./ro1 none ./u
>
> I am afraid this branch permission "=wh" returned an error. Did it
> really succeed?
It seems to be OK at my side. Here is the full log around the point that
I did it:
r...@coral:/dev/shm/a
T o n g:
> mount -t aufs -o br:./rw:./ro2=wh:./ro1 none ./u
I am afraid this branch permission "=wh" returned an error.
Did it really succeed?
> $ ls u/d?
> u/d1:
> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 four
:::
> $ find ro2
:::
> ro2/d1/.wh.2
> ro2/d1/.wh.3
> ro2/d1/four
> ro2/d1/.wh.4
B
On Fri, 06 Aug 2010 22:09:58 +0900, sfjro wrote:
>> but I also want to know, can the above aubrsync move be accumulative?
>>
>> I mean, if I move my modification down in shutdown script today, then I
>> wish that tomorrow I can move my new modification down in shutdown
>> script without affecting
T o n g:
> but I also want to know, can the above aubrsync move be accumulative?
>
> I mean, if I move my modification down in shutdown script today, then I
> wish that tomorrow I can move my new modification down in shutdown script
> without affecting my today's changes.
I guess so, as long as
13 matches
Mail list logo
