Am Samstag, 15. April 2006 03:24 schrieb Josef Sipek: > ... > 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. >
Sometimes ago I suggested to use a sort of layer-id to seperate the whiteouts of of one and the other unionfs, if they are used as union of unions. With the layer-id one could use .wh.<layer-id> as prefix for each union. What about this? Will this be included in the future? -- Wilhelm Meier email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ unionfs mailing list [email protected] http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
