| 1 |
On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 10:48 -0300, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 29 July 2005 10:26, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 3 |
> > We have no intentions of supporting unionfs support just yet, as it is |
| 4 |
> > still in heavy development and currently *only* usable on a correctly |
| 5 |
> > built Gentoo CD. We definitely won't be supporting it for live systems, |
| 6 |
> > as it isn't intended to be used as such, which is the primary reason why |
| 7 |
> > it *relies* on CDBOOT. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Now, we're always willing to accept patches, but we probably won't be |
| 10 |
> > investing time into making changes to the code now without them, except |
| 11 |
> > to better the CD support. |
| 12 |
> What do you think about making the linuxrc mount a unionfs with the ro part |
| 13 |
> only and using /sbin/rc to add /memory after starting the /dev management? |
| 14 |
> This will make the memory device available to be remounted ro during halt. Do |
| 15 |
> you consider this to better the CD support? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Except unionsfs does not support being remounted ro... period... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Ps.: I know that building a custom system demands the maintenance of some |
| 20 |
> hacks. I don't expect gentoo's scripts to work unmodified, but I want to make |
| 21 |
> the hacks as small as possible and contribute a little bit. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Well, it looks like we're going to have to remove the unionfs support |
| 24 |
from genkernel, simply because it is not ready for use and now we're |
| 25 |
already having people filing bugs on it to make it work how they want it |
| 26 |
when it isn't fully implemented yet. Basically, we're receiving too |
| 27 |
much noise on it. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 31 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager |
| 32 |
Games - Developer |
| 33 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives