Hi, nice to see that unionfs finally tries to get in :) >+Whiteouts: >+========== >+ >+A whiteout removes a file name from the name-space. Whiteouts are needed when >+one attempts to remove a file on a read-only branch. "namespace". >+Suppose we have a two branch union, where branch 0 is read-write and branch 1 I'd go for "two-branch". >+Copyup: >+======= >+ >+When a change is made to the contents of a file's data or meta-data, they >+have to be stored somewhere. The best way is to create a copy of the >+original file on a branch that is writable, and then redirect the write >+though to this copy. The copy must be made on a higher priority branch so >+that lookup & readdir return this newer "version" of the file rather than >+the original (see duplicate elimination). Apropos copyup, sparse copyup would probably a nice feature in future, but it also has its effects. >--- linux-2.6-git/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt 1969-12-31 19:00:00.000000000 -0500 >+++ linux-2.6-git-unionfs/Documentation/filesystems/unionfs/usage.txt 2006-08-31 19:25:19.000000000 -0400 >+ >+mount -t unionfs -o branch-option[,union-options[,...]] none unionfs should read mount -t unionfs -o branch-option[,union-options[,...]] none MOUNTPOINT >+KNOWN ISSUES: >+============= >+ >+The NFS server returns -EACCES for read-only exports, instead of -EROFS. This Will the NFS code ever be changed to return EROFS instead? >+nfs-mouted branch. mounted >+Modifying a Unionfs branch directly, while the union is mounted is currently >+unsupported. Any such change can cause Unionfs to oops, however it could even >+BRESULT IN DATA LOSS. RESULT Jan Engelhardt -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
