Hello Josef, Josef Sipek wrote:
>On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 09:39:57AM +0200, Werner Schulte wrote: > > >>Hi all, >> >>I have one host using a 2.6.11 kernel (Debian Sarge) >> >> > >1.1.x > > > >>and one using a 2.6.5 kernel (SuSE SLES9). >> >> > >This kernel is way too old, and as far as I know SuSE "customizes" their >beyond belief so even if there was a recent version of unionfs I would >be skeptical. > > > >>P.S. Would it be possible to use a ro dir by several different >>writeable dirs concurrently ? >> >> > >Due to the way Linux VFS is designed, Unionfs users suffer from the fact >that they cannot modify the branches without using unionfs. Having two >unions use the same ro branch would cause the same problems. > > I do not understand your comment. Let me try explain, what I plan to do. OpenEmbedded builds a Linux Distribution (mostly embedded) from scratch (which needs lots of space, if cloned for every developer and causes inconsistency over the time). We ( a group of SW developers) do want to use a "global" (ro) "stable" distribution as a basis for our development and extend that distribution in our home dirs until we are happy with the ( extension ) result. Afterwards the result will be integrated into the "global" distribution and the game starts again. Important is, that NO changes affect the "global" part during development phase (even if OpenEmbedded build tool wants to install parts of the developement into its "staging" area (which is located in the ro part). Therefore it was planned to unionfs it ro. The setup I was trying to use is mount -t unionfs -o dirs=$HOME/oerw=rw:/usr/local/oeglobal=ro unionfs $HOME/oe for several users (3-5). In fact it would be nice, if I were not forced to use a "dummy" $HOME/oe dir as I could use $HOME/oerw directly. But thats not problem really. Can you please comment on this ? Thanks and regards Werner >Jeff. > > > _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
