Re: [Devil-linux-develop] [Devil-Linux-discuss] DL configuration/Unionfs

[Heiko Z. <he...@zu...>]

Quoting Bruce Smith <bw...@ar...>:

>> > Since UnionFS is already working in DL, I want to first get this working
>> > with unionfs and prove the concept that it will function as planned.
>> >
>> > Once we've proved it works with UnionFS, we can [try to] add aufs to DL.
>> > Since they function similar then it should be easy to switch between
>> > UnionFS and aufs.  Right???
>> >
>> > Maybe we could make a menuconfig option to select which FS to use.
>>
>> Sounds like a good plan to me.
>
> Is the fact that aufs is only in cvs, no tarballs available, going to be
> a problem?

The is a benefit and downside.
Benefit: We would always get the latest code.
Downside: We would always get the latest code.

If he's currently working on something and about half of it is checked  
in, we get code which won't work.

> It's fairly simple to check out aufs from cvs and make our own tarball.
> I tried it yesterday, and the whole thing is only 1.8M.
>
> ...../aufs.wcvs$  du -sh .
> 1.8M    .
>
> One nice thing is it's primarily a kernel module, and kernel patches may
> not be necessary.  There are some optional kernel patches, which may be
> required depending on what kernel options are selected.  I haven't
> checked it against our kernel options yet.

This may be a good thing.

-- 

Regards
   Heiko Zuerker
   http://www.devil-linux.org



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.