Hi, On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 06:07:20AM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> settrans myroot unionfs / --mount overlay && chroot myroot > > (BTW, this is an obvious use case for union-mounting with something > different than the underlying node -- why didn't I see this before? Actually there is a problem here: with transparent mounting, the translator gets a port to the real underlying node. However, the real underlying node is meaningless in this case, as we don't even include it in the union. Effectively, we use the explicitely included directory as underlying filesystem. I wonder whether passing, when there is no -u, a port to the first "normal" directory in the union instead, would suffice to make things behave as expected? Or would it cause even more confusion?... -antrik-
