[ANN] unionfs patchset-19-20070504 release,

[Danny Braniss]

Hi Guys
It is my pleasure and honor to announce the availability of
the unionfs patchset-19-20070504. p19 is second patchset after
its merged of FreeBSD. Our improvements works of unionfs are
going step by step. p19 is milestone release.
For 7-current
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs-p19-20070504.diff
For 6-stable
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/unionfs6-p19-20070504.diff
Changes in unionfs-p19-20070504.diff
- It has been became MPSAFE.
- Default copy mode has been changed from traditional-mode to
transparent-mode. Some folks who have reported some issues
have solved with transparent mode. We guess it is time to
change the default copy mode. The transparent-mode is the
best in most situations.
- Fixed kern/111262 issue.
- Added support of vfs_cache on unionfs. As a result, you
can use applications that use procfs on unionfs.
- Removed unionfs internal cache mechanism because it has
vfs_cache support instead. As a result, it just simplified
code of unionfs.
- Added whiteout behavior option. ``-o whiteout=always'' is
default mode(it is established practice) and
``-o whiteout=whenneeded'' is less disk-space using mode
especially for resource restricted environments like embedded
environments. (Contributed by Ed Schouten. Thanks)
- Fixed a mtx lock issue happened with nullfs.
- Fixed lock issues around unionfs.
- Added NULL check code pointed out by Coverity. (Pointed out
by Stanislav Sedov. Thanks)
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/ (English)
http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi/unionfs/index-ja.html (Japanese)
Unionfs lovers including FreeSBIE developers, ports cluster managers,
heavy memory-fs users and folks use unionfs, could you try p19 please?
I have plan to commit unionfs-p19-20070504.diff to -current after
received unionfs users responses.
Thanks
P.S.
I am going to join BSDCan 2007. Lets meet at Ottawa, Canada :)
--
Daichi GOTO, http://people.freebsd.org/~daichi

Hi,
So far I've tested it under -current, in my diskless env. where
/etc & /compat/linux are unionfs'ed with a mfs, and so all seems OK.

thanks,
danny

[Roman Divacky]

Post by Danny Braniss
Hi,
So far I've tested it under -current, in my diskless env. where
/etc & /compat/linux are unionfs'ed with a mfs, and so all seems OK.

there's an XXX in the linuxulator code saying:

XXX Untested vs. mount -o union; probably does the wrong thing.

can you confirm that it works ok with unionfs from daichi?

thnx

roman

[Danny Braniss]

Post by Roman Divacky

Post by Danny Braniss
Hi,
So far I've tested it under -current, in my diskless env. where
/etc & /compat/linux are unionfs'ed with a mfs, and so all seems OK.

XXX Untested vs. mount -o union; probably does the wrong thing.
can you confirm that it works ok with unionfs from daichi?

sure, but what/how do you want me to test?
danny