Re: [PATCHES] fix for Ubuntu support, live-initramfs
Daniel Baumann wrote:
Yes, that's why aufs2. However, AFAIK, what J. R. Okajima has sent to
mainline kernel is aufs2, not aufs1. I might be wrong.
Steven Shiau wrote:
Note: it becomes clear that "Aufs was rejected. Let's give it up."
According to Christoph Hellwig, linux rejects all union-type filesystems
i might be wrong, but isn't that why there's aufs2?
There are more info here:
"I have posted aufs patches to LKML a few months before. And it becomes
clear that "Aufs was rejected. Let's give it up."
According to Christoph Hellwig, linux rejects all union-type
filesystems but UnionMount.
Definitely! kernel based is much better. union-fuse is just an option
when there is no union-type file system available in some cases, e.g.
the Ubuntu 9.10 alpha2... it does not include unionfs, aufs, aufs2...
because of the reason mentioned previously IIRC. Actually the Ubuntu
9.10 alpha 2 live CD is using unionfs-fuse.
Therefore in the future, maybe it's better that live-initramfs can
support unionfs-fuse, and unionmount.
even tough having unionfs-fuse optionally arround would be nice, i'd
always prefere kernel based union (as long as it's
possible/maintainable). it's way faster, and pulling in fuse into the
initrd is quite much (for systems with low ram).
Steven Shiau <steven _at_ nchc org tw> <steven _at_ stevenshiau org>
National Center for High-performance Computing, Taiwan.
Public Key Server PGP Key ID: 1024D/9762755A
Fingerprint: A2A1 08B7 C22C 3D06 34DB F4BC 08B3 E3D7 9762 755A