Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010

try the latest patch as follow: For 7-current patch: http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p4.diff For 6.x patch: http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs6-p4.diff -- ONGS Inc. Masanori OZAWA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) WWW: http://www.ongs.co.jp

Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010

S Inc. Masanori OZAWA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) WWW: http://www.ongs.co.jp/ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010

Danny Braniss wrote: Masanori OZAWA wrote: [...] Nice work! This is just a "works for me". In only find some issues with permissions that were already present in the previous implementation of unionfs. Some of them are partially corrected in the "useful" copymode. I maile

Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010

) { struct union_mount *um = MOUNTTOUNIONMOUNT(mp); patch end -- ONGS Inc. Masanori OZAWA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) WWW: http://www.ongs.co.jp/ ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To

[unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010

ion rather than to get change of unionf's implementation. However, as a first step of the unionfs-improvements, to merge my patches is very meaningful I think. Finally, so sorry my English is not enough to get communication with you. My boss, [EMAIL PROTECTED] gives us the help of communicati