Hello, On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 02:42:29PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 04:40:04PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:00:03PM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 08:59:15PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > > > If so, unionmount could be used with a bootstrap filesystem in the > > > > case of LiveCDs, for instance. > > > > > > Exactly. > > > > Hm, then it probably makes sense to look at implementing the bootstrap > > fsys_* RPCs in the future. IIRC, LiveCDs are big requestors of > > unioning functionality, so being able to work in this context would be > > a nice feature. > > Well, as I said, I'm not sure it's even possible to use it like that... > And I don't want to think about it right now :-)
OK :-) > Not saying we need to implement them any time soon. My point was only > that these RPCs *might* make sense for unionmount after all -- you were > a bit too quick with discarding this possibility :-) Aha, I see your point :-) > > The problem is as follows. Usually, when you want to overload the > > default implementation of a stub (like netfs_S_file_set_translator), > > you just redefine this function in your code (which I successfully did > > for netfs_S_file_set_translator in nsmux, IIRC). However, when I try > > to do the same with netfs_S_fsys_* RPCs, my new functions are not > > called, so I fail to do the simple overloading. > > That's strange indeed... I'll look into this problem as soon as I have time for it. Regards, scolobb
