Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
> I'm not sure there's a way to tell the difference: the overlay
> filesystem always uses a standard filesystem (e.g. can be ext3),
Understood.
> tho you
> could try and detect the presence of the special meta-files that the
> overlay system uses.
Indeed.
> I'm not sure it's worth the trouble: just like the
> previous poster, "I've never seen a real reason why would this be
> better" for extroot.
Well, for me the difference is whether the extroot device has the ability to
"stand-alone" and not require anything of the flashed image('s root filesystem)
or whether it's really supposed to be a union of what's on the flashed image
and
what changes have been made and as such, is dependent on the particular flashed
image it was made to work on.
I want the flexibility of the former. I want my extroot device to be the
entire
root filesystem of my system and not require a particular flashed image because
it relies on files in the flashed image's root filesystem.
b.
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
