Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Tue 23 Sep 2014, 10:26
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
Unionfs and bin, sbin, lib
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
Author Message
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 00:43    Post subject:    

Darn! I was hoping someone actually had a fix for unionfs. Trying to get it to work under 2.6.33, since aufs seems to be having an issue with corrupting the save file. Mad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7047
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 02:57    Post subject:  

I subscribe to the unionfs mail list, and it's a dead project.

I was forced to leave unionfs some time ago as bugs weren't getting fixed. For quite a long time now, people have posted to the mail list with problems, but no reply.

Actually, it doesn't necessarily mean the project is dead. The developers have done this before, ignore posts, while they are in fact still working on new code. Well, they are ivory tower academics.

EDIT: I just looked at the project web site, they are still releasing new versions, so it isn't dead. Just seems like it from monitoring the mail list.

_________________
http://bkhome.org/news/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
amigo

Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 2248

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 05:51    Post subject:  

But unionfs is now in the kernel, right? So development will have moved there. Most projects don't maintain external development branches once they become part of the kernel -alsa is an exception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
nooby

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Posts: 10557
Location: SwedenEurope

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 06:22    Post subject:  

if union fs is part of the kernel for all linuxes then the Ubuntu people have no excuse for not allowing an ubuntu save on ntfs as puppy can do.

Slackware derivatives can save on NTFS too. Knoppix and DSL maybe can. I have not tested it. They are not good at recognizing new hardware.

Puppy is unique in how easy it is to set up a frugal install with one subdirectory for each puppy and it takes only some seconds to a few minutes to add an install of a new puppy together with the others while doing that for ubuntu would be very tedious and with no save.

So if unionfs is in the kernel they should be able to add save to NTFS?
Maybe they don't want to?

_________________
I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7047
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 09:34    Post subject:  

amigo wrote:
But unionfs is now in the kernel, right? So development will have moved there. Most projects don't maintain external development branches once they become part of the kernel -alsa is an exception.


No it isn't.

_________________
http://bkhome.org/news/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 16:39    Post subject:  

I may have found a user-contributed patch for the set-attr bug that's crashing me at the moment - also mounting some tmpfs on /dev/shm fixes the worst of the crashes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
jemimah


Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Posts: 4309
Location: Tampa, FL

PostPosted: Sat 13 Mar 2010, 23:03    Post subject:  

My initial tests seem to confirm that mounting /dev/shm and applying the attached patch do make using unionfs a possibility. I need to run it for a few days to make sure, but I think I'm going to switch Puppeee over since I have no idea what's causing the problem with aufs on 2.6.33 and I really want the updated network drivers.
unionfs-unlink.patch.gz
Description 
gz

 Download 
Filename  unionfs-unlink.patch.gz 
Filesize  295 Bytes 
Downloaded  332 Time(s) 
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [7 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Cutting edge
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0518s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0040s) ][ GZIP on ]