On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 11:32:18AM +0300, Denis Shaposhnikov wrote: > >>>>> "Kris" == Kris Kennaway <kris_at_FreeBSD.ORG> writes: > > Kris> But it works, and doesn't panic the system. unionfs is > Kris> well-documented to be broken, and this is unlikely to change in > Kris> the near future. > > That's a recent regression, unionfs works fine on > > FreeBSD sagitta.internal.vlink.ru 6.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 6.0-CURRENT #1: Wed Dec 1 17:39:09 MSK 2004 dsh_at_rigel.internal.vlink.ru:/var/FreeBSD/obj/var/FreeBSD/src/sys/SAGITTA i386 > > And if unionfs panic the system on 5.4 too, I think it can't be STABLE > at all. > > BTW, from man mount_nullfs: > > BUGS > THIS FILE SYSTEM TYPE IS NOT YET FULLY SUPPORTED (READ: IT DOESN'T WORK) > AND USING IT MAY, IN FACT, DESTROY DATA ON YOUR SYSTEM. USE AT > YOUR OWN RISK. BEWARE OF DOG. SLIPPERY WHEN WET. > > So you can't suggest to use nullfs instead of unionfs, because "is > well-documented to be broken". That comment seems to be out of date. I'm not aware of any existing bugs in nullfs in 5.x and 6.x. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe <forsythe_at_alum.mit.edu>Received on Mon Mar 07 2005 - 16:02:54 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:29 UTC