> 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, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>