Re: subhurds etc.

2009-11-04 Thread Sergiu Ivanov
Hello, On Sun, Nov 01, 2009 at 01:52:47PM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > I do backups of sensitive information, but the reason I want a > > snapshotting filesystem for is automated decision when to do the > > backup. >

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-11-04 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Am Sonntag, 1. November 2009 13:52:47 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net: > The original idea for versioning filesystems was to automatically keep > track of individual changes, and it failed magnificently. As far as I know they didn't have atomic commits back then - am I right in that? > This is

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-11-03 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > I do backups of sensitive information, but the reason I want a > snapshotting filesystem for is automated decision when to do the > backup. There is no automated decision, that was my whole point! The original idea for version

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-10-28 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Am Montag, 26. Oktober 2009 07:22:28 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net: > I have some vague ideas how such partial subhurds could be used; but not > really much of an idea how such a setup would look like exactly... > Probably needs some very concrete use case(s) to work from. Can you think of some?

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-10-28 Thread Sergiu Ivanov
Hello, On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:22:28AM +0100, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:38:08PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > I'd like to have a snapshotting filesystem at my box, because having > > experienced the possibility to roll anything back in git, I'd be happy >

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-10-28 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 03:38:08PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:58:52AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > > > wrote: >

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-09-23 Thread Sergiu Ivanov
Hello, On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 01:58:52AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > > wrote: > > > > It's much more interesting to have a partially customized > > >

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-09-23 Thread Arne Babenhauserheide
Am Dienstag, 22. September 2009 01:58:52 schrieb olafbuddenha...@gmx.net: > The snapshotting filesystems we are seeing now OTOH avoid all this, by > not trying to track individual changes, but rather only creating > snaphots of the current state on explicit request. (With manual > triggering, or ti

Re: subhurds etc.

2009-09-22 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 09:46:23AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net > wrote: > > It's much more interesting to have a partially customized > > environment *without* booting a complete extra system instance; but > > rather accessin

Re: subhurds etc. (was: Hiding nodes with unionmount)

2009-08-18 Thread Sergiu Ivanov
Hello, On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:59:49AM +0200, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:14:32AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > > And it would be nice to be able to just use the same base Hurd for the > > main hurd and all subhurds - it needs a readonly mounted partit

Re: subhurds (ext2fs) vs. sparse files

2007-02-09 Thread Roland McGrath
> Booting a subhurd from a file system that resides on a sparse file > currently fails like this: ``ext2fs: pseudo-root: panic: > get_hypermetadata: disk size (115085312 bytes) too small; superblock says > we need 419430400''. This comes from the size of the store reported by libstore. Try storei

Re: subhurds

2006-08-06 Thread Thomas Schwinge
Hello! On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 07:59:23PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Are subhurds meant to be bootable by ordinary mortals? > > As Marcus and Roland mentioned, this in theory works but in practice > is not well explored. > > I believe th

Re: subhurds

2006-08-05 Thread Thomas Bushnell BSG
Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Are subhurds meant to be bootable by ordinary mortals? As Marcus and Roland mentioned, this in theory works but in practice is not well explored. I believe that it is important that it really work, so this is a good tasklist item. Thomas ___

Re: subhurds

2006-08-04 Thread Roland McGrath
Yeah, what Marcus said. It should work. I vaguely recall there being some strange complexities in doing it, like proc not having the host-priv port. If you investigate the failure, we'll remember what the issues are. ___ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd

Re: subhurds

2006-08-04 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
At Fri, 4 Aug 2006 16:01:20 +0200, Thomas Schwinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [1 ] > [1.1 ] > Hello! > > Are subhurds meant to be bootable by ordinary mortals? Trying this > currently looks like this: As far as I remember there was some support for subhurds run by a non-privileged user, b