On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 09:23:09PM -0400, Josef Sipek wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 03:57:11AM -0700, Kenneth Duda wrote: > > Consider this test script: > > > > mount -t unionfs -o dirs=/tmp/b1=rw:/tmp/nfs=ro none ub > > For nfs banches that are read-only, you should use nfsro instead of ro. > > > if you are looking for one, it isn't there, so returning ENOENT is > > correct. (An attempt to create a ".wh." file still returns EPERM). > > It makes sense to return ENOENT during lookup, but it is more involved > than the patch you provided. > > Also, your patch makes unionfs return ENOENT whenever one tries to > lookup .wh. - a lookup is part of open, etc., therefore one gets ENOENT > when doing something like: touch .wh.foo
Oh, and I forgot to say: we don't support union of unions, simply because one cannot be certain which level a whiteout belongs to. Jeff _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
