Jason Lunz: > Interesting. What other choice do I have if I'm using a typical > writable-cow-on-readonly-squashfs sort of embedded setup?
How about these? - ramdisk + mke2fs + mount - tmpfs + loopback ext2 fs-image + mount > What about just using noxino? In what situations is xino necessary? What > sort of programs would notice they were running on a noxino union? I'm > aware of backup programs like amanda paying attention to inode numbers, > but I don't know of anything else where it matters. Without xino, the inode number in aufs will change silently and unexpectedly. And some apps will have minor troubles, such as - chown/chmod -R to a large directory, since these tools checks the inode number. - rmdir discards the cached child inodes, thus after the failure of rmdir, all children under the dir will have different inode number. These are the cases I remember now. If you think these are very minor and ignorable, you can try noxino option. > btw, the total number of inodes for tmpfs appears to be unrelated to the > numbers it assigns, so limiting the total won't help. Essentially you are right, but will it help to stop growing your xino file, won't it? Junjiro Okajima ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
