From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Apr 16 13: 9:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from poynting.physics.purdue.edu (poynting.physics.purdue.edu [128.210.146.58]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1042415A59 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:09:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ajk@physics.purdue.edu) Received: from physics.purdue.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by poynting.physics.purdue.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA05648; Fri, 16 Apr 1999 15:06:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ajk@physics.purdue.edu) Message-Id: <199904162006.PAA05648@poynting.physics.purdue.edu> To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Greg Black , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Entombing for FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message from Matthew Dillon of "Fri, 16 Apr 1999 12:55:37 MST." <199904161955.MAA59781@apollo.backplane.com> From: "Andrew J. Korty" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <5641.924293206.1@physics.purdue.edu> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 15:06:46 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I've been thinking about this enombing thing... well, I hate to > say it, but crowbaring into libc is *not* the right way to do > it. It's just too intrusive. The right way to do it would be > to write a device driver similar to NULLFS which handles backing > up the files, thus giving the sysad the option to use such a > device to mount-through those partitions that the sysad wants to > keep checkpointed. Also, putting such intrusive code into libc > would be fairly dangreous from a security point of view even if > it is turned off. > > -Matt > Matthew Dillon > That makes sense, but do stackable filesystems work properly in FreeBSD? I have many uses for the null and union filesystems, but they seem to tend to cause panics. ajk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message