From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 6 22:40:27 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F7F16A4D4 for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 22:40:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from anduin.net (anduin.net [212.12.46.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F3F43DBF for ; Fri, 6 May 2005 22:40:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ltning@anduin.net) Received: from ranger.anduin.net ([81.0.162.52] helo=[192.168.1.110]) by anduin.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.50 (FreeBSD)) id 1DUBUe-000Ncd-VU for stable@freebsd.org; Sat, 07 May 2005 00:40:26 +0200 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913 Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 00:39:21 +0200 From: Eirik =?ISO-8859-1?B?2A==?=verby To: "stable@freebsd.org" Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Subject: unionfs limitations? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 22:40:28 -0000 Hi, I just started playing with mounting ports into jails using unionfs (mount_unionfs -b /usr/ports_jail /usr/local/jails/jail-0/usr/ports), and many things seem to work fine. However, when trying to install either of mysql41-server or mysql41-client, I see the following: [root@mpi1] /usr/ports/databases/mysql41-server# make install ===> Installing for mysql-server-4.1.11_1 ===> mysql-server-4.1.11_1 depends on shared library: mysqlclient.14 - found ===> Generating temporary packing list ===> Checking if databases/mysql41-server already installed ln: POSIX: Operation not supported *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/databases/mysql41-server. Did I miss out on something, or is this not going to work? Do I need to think in other ways? I have stress-tested this setup pretty well over the last 24 hours, with as many as 20 mountpoints using the same ports tree, with constant package building in each of them. This was impossible last time I played with unionfs, so it must have stabilized somewhat ;) Anyone? /Eirik