On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:30:15PM -0700, Rus Foster wrote:
> Hi All,
> How stable is unionfs? Reading the man page for mount_unionfs its says
> that its not. Is that still true or is it better on 5.x? ATM I'm running
> 4.8
unionfs may work if you use it read-only and don't change files in the
low
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 11:30:15PM -0700, Rus Foster wrote:
> Hi All,
> How stable is unionfs? Reading the man page for mount_unionfs its says
> that its not. Is that still true or is it better on 5.x? ATM I'm running
> 4.8
mount -o union is very stable for me. note that this is not quite the same
Hi All,
How stable is unionfs? Reading the man page for mount_unionfs its says
that its not. Is that still true or is it better on 5.x? ATM I'm running
4.8
Rgds
Rus
--
www: http://jvds.com | Virtual Servers from just $15/mo
MSNM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Totally Customizable Technology
e: [EMAIL PRO
