Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hmmm, sorry for asking, but when do you plan to offer a "working" > union-mount (u-m)? It's a maze of twisty locking problems - some of which also apply to things like overlayfs:-( > What's the status of the user-space tools or are they no more needed? You need to be able to tell mount(2) that you want a union. This is currently done with a mount flag, but it might be portable to something in the mount option string. > AFAICS the original authors patched e2fsprogs etc. (see Valerie's old > homepage [1]). Yeah... I guess fsck programs need to be able to handle whiteout and fallthru directory entries. > >> Where does the development happen - in [1]? > > > > On a git tree on my PC - which is occasionally mirrored in [1] when I've got > > it working. > > > > Development on your local workstation does not look like you do an > open development. Excuse me. But it's quite hard to develop this on a remote git tree. Further, I prefer not to push partially working stuff to my git tree, lest someone pull it, try playing with it and have their fs eaten. If someone wants it, I can mail the partially working stuff to them, but not many people ask. > So, it's currently only you doing the work on u-m? Almost entirely, yes. David -- 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
