Subject: Re: Using tmpfs instead of mfs for "MAKEDEV -M"
To: None <tech-userlevel@NetBSD.org>
From: Alan Barrett <email@example.com>
Date: 12/12/2007 10:44:40
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Bill Stouder-Studenmund wrote:
> Note that -o union != mount -t unionfs. Also, my understanding was
> that unionfs created the whiteouts, so that even if tmpfs supported
> them, you wouldn't see a difference in how /dev is handled.
I know about the difference between mount -o union and mount -t unionfs,
but I thought that both were supposed to support whiteouts. I see now
that in fact "mount_mfs -o union" and "mount_tmpfs -o unoin" both have
the same behaviour here: deleting a file that exists in the lower layer
really deletes it, it doesn't make a whiteout in the upper layer.
If there are no further issues with using tmpfs for "MAKEDEV -M", I
plan to commit my patch on Friday.
--apb (Alan Barrett)