Re: exact semantics of union mounts (and TRYEMULROOT)

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 02:57:41PM -0400, Mouse wrote:
 > > Don't be silly.
 > 
 > I don't think it's silly.  Slavish adherence to an system A's semantics
 > when working on system B, just for the sake of adherence that _does_
 > strike me as silly.  Maybe that's not actually what's going on here,
 > but that's what it looks like to me.  Perhaps I'm missing something.

What, exactly, is gained by being gratuitously different from the
reference implementation of a concept?

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost