Quote Originally Posted by kl522 View Post
If you are talking about aufs kernel module for KNOPPIX, there is nothing to worry, Klaus K would have compiled the right version for it. If it had been the wrong version, it wouldn't compile with newer kernel and it won't run. It would be noticed !

By contrast the debian version might be old and faulty, because a typical debian user won't use aufs, so even if it is old and faulty, it would go unnoticed.

If you are talking about aufs-utils or aufs-tools, then I can't say anything about the debian version, because in a typical use, the aufs-utils are not used at all. It would not be surprising if the package faulty.
May I suggest that you seem very optimistic about the situation?

First, aufs is a general tool, and it is used "everywhere", not only in Knoppix. The message I linked to was in response to a Debian user. A "typical" Debian user may not need it, true. But many essential libraries are never required by "typical" users, still they are essential.

Second, IF Klaus K has compiled the right version for aufs, then he has done a (rare) departure from his (recent?) general Debian compliance. Which would probably mostly be regarded as a hack, since it is not in sync with utils and tools, which we frequently need when we will modify or check something.

Third, I tend to believe the creator and maintainer of aufs. And the aufs relation to the mainline kernel is - well - "undecided" at best, see for instance the main sourceforge page (http://aufs.sourceforge.net/ ) :

Note: it becomes clear that "Aufs was rejected. Let's give it up." According to Christoph Hellwig, linux rejects all union-type filesystems but UnionMount.
So, as I interpret this, the last thing we should expect, is any kind of automagical updating and integration of aufs.