[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Plain dm-crypt

From: christopher . toews
Subject: Re: Plain dm-crypt
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:46:42 +0000
User-agent: Riseup mail

On 2015-10-29 08:49, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
-a already means "all". Having to indicate usb0 manually is already a
proof that you have an unmarked cryptocontainer. Moreover this line
exactly illustrates my point: what is usb0 depends on other plugged
device and even his fast they are and may vary from boot to boot. I'm
not quite convinced you can deny this line plausibly

No, since I type the line in manually every time, it is not located anywhere for it to be discovered and need denying. I know my system very well. I know if I put one USB drive into a slot, it will be named (USB0). If I plug more than one USB drive into the system, I know what they will be named based on their physical locations.

Look, you can't presume to know my setup better than I do and then try to convince me that I don't require this feature. I understand if it won't be included, but don't hold it out because you think people are too stupid to know how to use it, or worse, because you think people are too stupid to know that they don't need it. There are people who want this feature for good reasons and have the know-how to be able to utilize it. Why can't you just accept that?


On 2015-10-27 11:10, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:

There are patches for it but they will not be integrated as plain
has no advantages compared to LUKS and cannot be configured
reliably when
device names change as they have no UUID
Le 27 oct. 2015 8:20 AM, <address@hidden> a écrit :

I apologize if this question has already been asked. A web search
turn anything up. Are there any plans to include plain dm-crypt
support in
a future version of grub?

Thank you.

Grub-devel mailing list

Grub-devel mailing list

Grub-devel mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]