> > > > I've got a little problem here and I'm not sure if I did something wrong > > > > on my side or if there is something wrong with unionfs 1.0.14 (up to the > > > > latest snapshot). > > > > > > > > My problem: > > > > I have three branches mounted on /: > > > > 0: /mnt/rw (tmpfs, read-write) > > > > 1: /mnt/custom (ext2, read-only) > > > > 2: /mnt/rootfs (ext2, read-only) > > > > > > > > I'm in my home directory. > > > > I do a 'unionctl / --add --mode ro /mnt/test'. > > > > This one works without a problem. > > > > > > this confuses me. > > > > > > so you have 3 directories > > > > > > /mnt/rw > > > /mnt/custom > > > /mnt/rootfs > > > > > > which you union as / > > > > > > then you add /mnt/test > > > > > > so basically you seem to be trying to union a lower directory with > > > itself. This seems to be setting you up for major pain, as you could > > > change the union below unionfs by just modifying /mnt/test directly. > > > > As '/mnt' is mounted from a different partition this shouldn't effect > > UnionFS, correct? > > no, I think it would, but I'm not an expert on this. What I'd perhaps > do (but again not an expert) is creeate a /newroot with unionfs and then > pivot root to /newroot, but don't know if that work.
I just tried a few snapshots in between the 1.0.13 and 1.0.14 release. It still works without a deadlock in 20050811-0941, but is broken in 20050829-0915. I'm going to further track it down tomorrow.. _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
