Current status of nullfs and/or unionfs?

[Frank Knobbe]

On Thu, 2005-05-05 at 14:06 +0200, Eirik =?ISO-8859-1?B?2A==?=verby
wrote:
> [...] The solution, or at least parts of it, would be to have certain parts of the
> jail filesystems mounted in via nullfs (acceptable solution) or unionfs
> (ideal solution). However, ever since FreeBSD 4.10 this has been a major
> problem, as both filesystems started exhibiting major stability and data
> integrity issues. 
> [...]
> What can I expect to see when trying nullfs and/or unionfs today? Has
> anything changed?

Don't know if anything has changed, but I'm using nullfs to mount the
ports directory of the host into jails. No ill effects. Works great,
both under 4.10 and 5.3.

(Back when I toyed with unionfs, I found that to be a bit unstable. But
nullfs appears pretty solid)

Regards,
Frank

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20050505/1427b252/attachment.bin