Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 18:30:48 -0500 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> To: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the current status of nullfs, unionfs Message-ID: <200503101830.49047.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU> References: <200503091838.06322.mi%2Bmx@aldan.algebra.com> <20050310023518.GA11712@VARK.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Nullfs works better than unionfs. Unionfs worked well in 4.X. > > What about the `union' option to regular mounts? Is that safe to use? [...] > Last I checked, it [mount -ounion -mi] was very broken, but I'm not sure. BTW, how is unionfs different from nullfs with the union option? mount -t nullfs -ounion /a /b vs. mount -t unionfs /a /b ? Thanks! -mi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200503101830.49047.mi%2Bmx>