In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Benoit Guillon writes:
> Erez Zadok wrote:
>
> > To all, if there are any other stable 2.6 kernels you really need unionfs2
> >
> >for, please send me an email. Based on how much demand there is, we'll do
> >our best to accommodate (the older the kernel is, however, the longer it
> >could take to back-port the code).
> >
> >
> Could it be possible to have unionfs2 backported for 2.6.18? It is the
> kernel used in RHEL5, and I guess many people can be interested in. The
> problem with unionfs 1.4 and parsing errors makes unionfs unusable for
> 2.6.18 which is a pity.
Done: get the just-released backport to 2.6.18.8 off of
<http://unionfs.filesystems.org/>.
Benoit, I'd be very interested to know how well it works for you: my concern
is that vendor kernels (esp. the older you go) have so many changes compared
to vanilla, that I don't know how well our unionfs patches can be applied
and run.
Cheers,
Erez.
_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list: http://unionfs.filesystems.org/
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
