On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Sergiu
Ivanov<unlimitedscol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, sorry, I should have asked *you* in the first place :-( Please,
> forgive my absent-mindedness :-(
Nah, it's OK. Thomas and antrik are the right guys to ask in general,
since they're following your work and the Hurd much more than I do.
> I'm glad you feel okay about my suggestion :-) However, I'm not sure I
> can understand correctly what you mean by ``remove this feature''? Do
> you refer to pattern matching or to the stowing feature altogether?
Well, I think you're doing a very good job in keeping unionfs useful.
That's mostly your code (and your translator) now, so you should feel
free to do everything you want with it.
I think the stowing feature might be interesting. The pattern matching
feature has sense the way it is now because --stow is just a way to
tell "unify all subdirectories of the given one (as opposed to passing
them all as a parameter list, and adding them when creating a new
entry)", so all the pattern matching has to be done inside the
unionified directories.
It's your call, I think, to decide what to do with it.
Cheers,
Gianluca
--
It was a type of people I did not know, I found them very strange and
they did not inspire confidence at all. Later I learned that I had been
introduced to electronic engineers.
E. W. Dijkstra
