Re: unionfs: stowing feature

[Sergiu Ivanov]

Hello,

On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 03:37:23AM +0200, olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:07:18AM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 10:42:41PM +0200, Gianluca Guida wrote:
> 
> > > I do agree that it's counter-intuitive. Please note that the stow
> > > functionality was mostly meant for the GNU system as a base for a --
> > > rather complex I'd say -- packaging system.
> > > 
> > > The idea was that the first level after the stow directory was the
> > > package, and we were matching against package's subdirectories. At
> > > the time, I was actually in favor of a separate stowfs which were
> > > just using common code for unionfs, but politics and other rather
> > > meaningless reasons brought it into the way it is now.
> > 
> > I see...  It has never occurred to me that unionfs could be used in a
> > packaging system :-)
> >  
> > I wonder whether there is still the necessity to keep things as they
> > are.  I can see that the files in which you are mentioned as the
> > author date back to 2005, so requirements might have changed in the
> > meantime.
> 
> The requirements haven't changed. In fact, there is no movement on this
> front at all ;-)
> 
> But you have a point there: just matching everything below the top level
> directory (so you'd have to pass "*/bin" instead of "bin" for the
> original use case), would be both more intuitive *and* more generic...

OK.  I'll change the pattern matching behaviour shortly.

Regards,
scolobb