2009-06-04 11:38:49

by Scott James Remnant

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/32] VFS based Union Mount (V3)

On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:

> Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation.
>
Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD.
A switch to a devmapper/snapshot based implementation lost the property
that we could rsync the filesystem (squashfs has been nicely rsyncable).

What kind of testing do you need doing, and where would you like the bug
reports/patches? :-)

Scott
--
Scott James Remnant
[email protected]


Attachments:
signature.asc (197.00 B)
This is a digitally signed message part

2009-06-09 22:15:51

by Valerie Aurora

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/32] VFS based Union Mount (V3)

On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 12:38:50PM +0100, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 18:08 +0200, Jan Blunck wrote:
>
> > Here is another post of the VFS based union mount implementation.
> >
> Awesome work, this may just get us out of a tight spot with our LiveCD.
> A switch to a devmapper/snapshot based implementation lost the property
> that we could rsync the filesystem (squashfs has been nicely rsyncable).
>
> What kind of testing do you need doing, and where would you like the bug
> reports/patches? :-)

Just try to use it to do real work and I'm sure it will break real
good. :) Bug reports and patches to [email protected] and
cc'd to Jan and I.

Thanks!

-VAL