Re: [PATCH 0/5] Change unionfs argument handling policy

[olafBuddenhagen]

Hi,

On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 01:52:50PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:08 PM, <olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net> wrote:

> > But now that you mention it, I see that indeed it might be an
> > interesting option to let settrans do all the setup, and have the
> > translator component only serve as a helper...
[...]
> Do you mean that ``settrans --unionmount'' should use unionfs to
> actually do the union mount?

Perhaps. The ideas are all very vague still.

> If so, what shall the mountee sit on?

Obviously, we need some helper that handles the internal node.

> If not so, I fail to see any special advantage of this syntax compared
> to ``settrans <node> unionmount <translator>''.

The obvious advantage is that it is simpler and more intuitive for the
user.

Not sure about the technical merits yet...

-antrik-