Is this case use correct, or is it a risky way of doing things?

[cesss]

I have several read-only branches, and each of them has /bin and /lib subdirectories. Then I have a read-write branch which is completely empty (ie: it has no /bin nor /lib subdirs inside).

Then I create the union mount as 'unionfs -o cow branches/store=RW:branches/1=RO:branches/2=RO:branches/3=RO:branches/4=RO myunion'

And then I create a new file myunion/bin/newcommand

I verified that a new /bin subdirectory is then created in branches/store (the only RW branch, which was initially empty), and the 'newcommand' file is put in branches/store/bin/newcommand

This is behaviour I desire, but should I have created the /bin directory inside branches/store before mounting the union, or is it perfectly OK to leave to unionfs-fuse the task of creating the /bin directory?

Thanks!!

[mrvn]

That's perfectly OK.

This issue should be closed.