<olafbuddenha...@gmx.net> writes: > I actually realized a couple of days ago that unionmount could probably > be done by a combination of nsmux and unionfs: I think it should be > possible to do something like > > settrans veth /hurd/unionfs veth veth,,eth-multiplexer
unionfs has option ``-u'' which tells it to include the underlying node in the list of the merged filesystems, so this command should be rewritten like settrans veth /hurd/unionfs -u veth,,eth-multiplexer I think that doing in the way you suggest will not result in something useful, because when unionfs opens node ``veth'', this node will already be translated by unionfs itself, which means that unionfs will not have access to the underlying filesystem, as it was obviously intended. Regards, scolobb
