| 1 |
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 11:02 -0300, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 29 July 2005 10:53, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Except unionsfs does not support being remounted ro... period... |
| 4 |
> remounting /memory ro. Not unionfs |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Ehh... whatever. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> > Well, it looks like we're going to have to remove the unionfs support |
| 9 |
> > from genkernel, simply because it is not ready for use and now we're |
| 10 |
> > already having people filing bugs on it to make it work how they want it |
| 11 |
> > when it isn't fully implemented yet. Basically, we're receiving too |
| 12 |
> > much noise on it. |
| 13 |
> What a pity :( |
| 14 |
> Don't consider my comments a bug report. I am offering to implement something |
| 15 |
> and would like to know if it is desirable. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
We have no intentions on building support for unionfs for a non-CD |
| 18 |
build. It simply does not belong in the initramfs *at all* if it isn't |
| 19 |
for a CD. This is the reason we're removing the support, so we can |
| 20 |
build support that is CD-only properly and also so that proper support |
| 21 |
can be added to the init system for any non-CD unionfs. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Anyway, it is still a long ways off and isn't something we consider a |
| 24 |
priority, so I guess just stick around to see what becomes of it. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 28 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
| 29 |
Games - Developer |
| 30 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives