> Currently it is unclear which evolution way hepunion will take, but if > you want > - filesystem-type union (instead of mount-type union nor block device > level union) > - and name-based union (insated of inode-based union) > then the approach is similar to overlayfs's. > So it might be better to make overlayfs as the base of your development. > If supporting NFS branch (or exporting hepunion) is important for you, > then the inode-based solution will be necessary. > Thanks for the suggestion. I am looking forward to suggestions like these from the community so that we can have a universal union filesystem for mainline linux kernel with most of the use cases(including Cern's). Regards, Saket Sinha -- 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
