[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: No to StowFS!
From: |
Gianluca Guida |
Subject: |
Re: No to StowFS! |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Feb 2006 19:46:48 +0100 |
Hi,
On 2/3/06, Leonardo Pereira <leonardolopespereira@gmail.com> wrote:
> Possibilities to make a stowfsed system booting:
I was referring to *your* nowstowfs booting stuff, not mine.
As already said previously on this thread, stowfs is implemented as a
set of unionfs running, so no stowfs.static thing may happen. And btw,
where are details? :-)
> Did you tried any of those options?
Basically yes. They all failed for a reason or another.
So your proposal, how would it boot? (details)
--
It was a type of people I did not know, I found them very strange and
they did not inspire confidence at all. Later I learned that I had been
introduced to electronic engineers.
E. W. Dijkstra
- Re: No to StowFS!, (continued)
- Re: No to StowFS!, Richard M. Stallman, 2006/02/06
- Re: No to StowFS!, Filip Brcic, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, Gianluca Guida, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, Leonardo Pereira, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, Gianluca Guida, 2006/02/05
- Re: No to StowFS!, olafBuddenhagen, 2006/02/08
- Re: No to StowFS!, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2006/02/08
- Re: No to StowFS!, Thomas Bushnell BSG, 2006/02/08
- Message not available
- Re: No to StowFS!,
Gianluca Guida <=