Closed gliargovas closed 6 months ago
Should I also add some tests for this?
Could you rebase this to not have Eric's and Michael's commits? Maybe you just need to start your branch from future instead of main?
@mgree I have addressed all your comments. Feel free to merge!
before we merge, i’d like to take a bit and look into why CI is failing, i’ll try to repro this on my machines.
Talking with @angelhof about this, we realized there's a tricky interaction with process_changes
when you have multiple lowerdirs: you have to replay the merge to do the comparison.
The correct solution is to mergerfs mount the layers of lowerdir and compare against that merged lowerdir (rather than the $local_file
which just absolutizes to the real system root).
But until we have a use case where someone would want to use summaries and multiple lowerdirs (hs
doesn't want the summaries), we should punt on this and give a warning that -L
implies -n
.
Rebased this off main
@mgree, I addressed the comments you left.
Main workflow/test
is expected to fail because the workflow is changed to run ./scripts/setup.sh
in the' future' branch.
Cleaned everything unrelated to this PR
Oh, is this supposed to merge into future
or main
branch?
Could you also rebase off latest main or add in my latest commit so CI tests pass :pray:
nvm i got it!
This Pull Request introduces the
-L
flag totry
, enabling the specification and merging of multiple lower directories for overlay. The lower directories are specified as a colon-separated list (dir_1:dir_2:...:dir_n
), operating with a precedence logic where directories on the left have a higher precedence over those on the right. This feature allows users to overlay multiple directories together during the command execution within a single overlay environment.