Re: Symlink indirection

[John Bradford <john@bradfords.org.uk>]

> >     I don't understand what you are trying to explain.  Do you mean a
> > union mount, or a variation thereof?
> > 
> >     I thought Al Viro was going to do union mount support for 2.5, but
> > I haven't heard about it in a while.  Maybe it went in and no one noticed?

> I'm not familiar with the phrase 'union mount' and although google gives 
> wads of hits, I can't find a good description of it
> 
> What I mean is (contrived example with made-up mount option --overlay)

> mkdir a
> echo "a/x" > a/x
> echo "a/y" > a/y
> echo "a/z" > a/z
> 
> mkdir b
> echo "b/y" > b/y
> 
> mkdir c
> echo "c/z" > c/z
> 
> mkdir d
> mount --bind a d
> mount --bind --overlay b d
> mount --bind --overlay c d
> 
> cat d/x
> "a/x"
> 
> cat d/y
> "b/x"

Shouldn't that be "b/y"?

> cat d/z
> "c/z"

John.