Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > > As someone who uses an external root (tho using a hand-made patch > rather than your extroot, mostly because your extroot came later), > I don't want an overlay, but I indeed want a pivot_root rather than > a chroot.
I have to echo Stefan's sentiments exactly. I also use an extroot device, also with some hand-made patches (like Stefan, my patches pre-date the mainline extroot support), although I'd be more than happy to put them aside and use the mainline support -- if it supported real/stand-alone filesystems. I currently use ext3 for example. It also seems to me that extroot support should not be an either/or situation. I have not looked at the extroot implementation as it currently exists, but I would propose that the extroot feature should support both (overlay and stand-alone) and figure out which one to use on it's own. Why not have the implementation look at what's on the extroot device and if it's an overlay filesystem format then execute the overlay codepath(s) and otherwise assume it's a standalone filesystem and mount it and pivot_root to it. Cheers, b. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
