Documentation: Differences from Plan 9?

[navid-zamani]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Could you add, to the readme, a short but complete description of the differences to Plan 9’s union bind?

Describe the solution you'd like
Just if, and if yes then what, mergerfs lacks, that Plan 9’s union bind offers. So one can quickly assess if it is a full substitute or what one has to consider.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Using OverlayFS. Result: It sucks. Lots of weird quirks that make it unusable for general use.
Using Plan 9. Result: It doesn’t offer everything that Linux does. Like a modern browser.

Additional context
I found your project because I was tired of the sorry bad re-implementations of what Plan 9’s union bind did, and hoped to find something fully equivalent. But from the readme I can not tell if it is or isn’t. The features list specifically does not talk about most of the typical quirks that Unix implementations have and how they are solved. But instead about features unrelated to that. I presume that something (like full equivalency) is implied and considered obvious, given what this is. But it may not be as obvious as you may have thought to outsiders. :)

[trapexit]

Sure, though Linux's bind does not have that feature and Plan 9 isn't exactly a popular OS so it would mostly be academic.

Plan 9's union bind feature is a feature of the VFS AFAIU and as such lower level and more generic. The man page is very light on details so it is difficult to comment further. I'd need to find more documentation.

I don't think it is fair to compare to OverlayFS. They are solving very different concerns.