On 7/22/2012 11:56 AM, James Davidson wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maxim Kammerer" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, 21 July, 2012 11:51:35 AM
Hi James,
Sure. I attached my starting patch to BZ656
https://bugzilla.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/attachment.cgi?id=246
I saw bug #656, but perhaps I misunderstood — does this second patch
fix the issue you reported? I am currently exploring overlayfs, since
it seems like it will be eventually accepted into mainline, so not
sure at the moment when / if I will get to testing your port of
Unionfs to kernel 3.4.
No, the second patch I attached is just the
unionfs-2.5.11_for_3.3.0-rc3.diff.gz with a small conflict resolution for 3.4.
I assumed from your earlier e-mail that you wanted the starting patch because
of the conflict.
The first patch contains the changes I made to make unionfs compile for 3.4.
This will apply to the second patch I attached.
I am using the following two unionfs patches for MiniMyth:
<http://code.google.com/p/minimyth/source/browse/trunk/gar-minimyth/script/kernel-3.4/linux/files/linux-3.4.6-unionfs_2.5.11.patch>
<http://code.google.com/p/minimyth/source/browse/trunk/gar-minimyth/script/kernel-3.4/linux/files/linux-3.4.6-unionfs_2.5.11_linux_3.4.patch>
_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list: http://unionfs.filesystems.org/
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
