[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#778612: marked as done (live-boot: please remove obsolete unionmount support)



Your message dated Tue, 17 Feb 2015 14:59:19 +0100
with message-id <85r3toprk8.fsf@boum.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#778612: live-boot: please remove obsolete unionmount support
has caused the Debian Bug report #778612,
regarding live-boot: please remove obsolete unionmount support
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
778612: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=778612
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: live-boot
Severity: minor

Hello,

unionmount is obsolete and requires specially patched kernel and mount
binary. It is superseded by overlayfs which is in turn superseded by
overlay.

I think there is no point keeping support for this union type and traces
of it in the live scripts can only confuse users.

Thanks

Michal

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 8.0
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (910, 'testing'), (900, 'stable'), (410, 'unstable'), (400, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 3.18.0-trunk-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8) (ignored: LC_ALL set to en_US.UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 5.0~a1-1

> I think there is no point keeping support for this union type and traces
> of it in the live scripts can only confuse users.

It's been removed already :)

--- End Message ---

Reply to: