Jan Olszak <j.olszak@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> But what should happen on rename or unlink? > >> Both would operate on the original inode. > > And that would make this hugely complex. > Are you sure? Unlink would be the same as now - you just whiteout over the lower layer. Rename, though, would be complex - unless you go for the trivial option and just error out. The problem is that the only connection between the upper layer and lower layer is coincidence governed by filename. If you move the upper layer object, the lower layer object is no longer coincident and is effectively lost. You cannot move the lower layer object because the lower layer may be shared between multiple overlays. At the moment, rename deals You could, I suppose, store a "fall through" inode in the upper layer that has the NFS fh of the lower layer object attached in some fashion (eg. xattr), but it's messy. Hard linking would be even more complex - you'd have to hard link the "fall through" inodes on the upper layer. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
