Hi! On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 14:30:58 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > You are the first to report that this quirk actually causes problems > in real life. > > I have plans to fix this by adding a "redirector" attribute so that > copied up directories (and perhaps files) can refer to lower directory > that is found at a different location relative to the root of the > overlay from the location of the upper directory. > > Maybe an example can make this more clear: > > lower/foo/bar/baz > upper/foo/bar <- whiteout > upper/moved/here <- redirects to "foo/bar" > > will result in the tree: > > overlay/moved/here/baz That'd be very much appreciated, thanks! > > It does not seem very correct to put the burden on user-space to be aware > > of overlayfs restrictions such as this one. Renaming a directory is > > not something that happens often in practice in the uses cases where > > we use overlayfs but it's still frequent enough to deserve better than > > a EXDEV error IMO and dpkg trying to rename "foo/" into "foo.dpkg-tmp/" > > is in its right to assume that this rename will not cross any device > > boundary. > > The EXDEV trick just works for mv(1), hence this didn't seem to be a > big issue in practice. In dpkg, the directory is rename(2)d to perform an atomic temporary backup, so that it can be rolled-back in case of errors during unpacking. Having to possibly do a deep-copy and a deep-remove, and then trying to recover from errors inbetween those, would be very unsatisfactory. Thanks, Guillem -- 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
