A Dimecres, 1 de juny de 2011 21:34:16, vàreu escriure: > I guess the order will be a bit backwards for overlayfs. aufs allows > to take N ro filesystems and merge them and put a readwrite filesystem > on top (eg. tmpfs/A/B/C). You should be able to do tmpfs/A and > (tmpfs/A)/B and ((tmpfs/A)/B)/C with overlayfs without copying > anything anywhere but I am not sure how the resulting filesystem > compares to what you would get by combining these with aufs.
have you tried your proposal ? from my point of view, it will not work because overlayfs locks inodes in some of his functions, therefore if a mount of overlayfs has an inode locked then another overlayfs mount will be waiting for the same inode but it can not be available until the current function had finished, the kernel wll detect this uncoherent situation and print a dump. Thanks Jordi Pujol Live never ending Tale GNU/Linux Live forever! http://livenet.selfip.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-live-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201106020917.49899.jordipuj...@gmail.com
