On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Thomas Bächler
Okay, I received a few mails from Christopher Rogers who played with these filesystems and 2.6.29. According to his statements, he could get aufs2 to compile, but it only actually worked when he omitted the unionfs patch. Maintaining this patch mess has been a PITA, so I say we have a choice here: Choose one and drop the rest. I think aufs should not be considered, but only unionfs or aufs2. I don't use these, but the people who do should give some input on which one to choose.
The ISOs use unionfs, as does the devtools chroot scripts. But, switching to aufs seems painless. I'm not sure if the aufs2 interface is the same? If it is then we could easily fix up these things to support aufs2. What I'm saying is that we need one of these, but not all. As far as I know aufs is better than unionfs in all aspects, but I have never used aufs2. Has anyone used aufs2? Does unionfs still have that goofy NFS issue? Furthermore - which kernel patch is cleaner? That could be a decider for us too