an intresting problem

[mariodebian at gmail.com (mariodebian)]

El s?b, 06-10-2007 a las 19:46 +0200, Daniel Baumann escribi?:
> [ replied to the list, as it is probably interesting for other people too. ]
> 
> Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 06:44:14PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> >> Peter Skogstr?m wrote:
> >>> Im building on sid with live-helpe1.0~a30-1
> >> for sid, are you using aufs now?
> > Is that the recommended way now or is it a workaround or ??
> 
> for 2.6.22, there is currently no matching unionfs available in Debian.
> 
> I'll upgrade to unionfs 2.x soon, so that you can choose between aufs
> and unionfs, but for the moment, you have to use aufs.
> 

If you are interested in using unionfs with 2.6.22 kernels I have made
some patches.

I'm running thin clients with unionfs+squashfs with 2.6.22-2-486 without
problems.

http://trac.tcosproject.org/browser/trunk/tcos-extra-modules/patches


NOTE: tcos-extra-modules package build unionfs, squashfs, aufs, sis7019
and cdfs in unstable:

http://www.tcosproject.org/pool/main/t/tcos-extra-modules/

Greetings


-- 
http://soleup.eup.uva.es/mariodebian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada
	digitalmente
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-live-devel/attachments/20071006/697b3d37/attachment.pgp