On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 20:45:11 +0100 Guilhem Moulin <guil...@debian.org> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 at 19:34:46 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote: > > Do I take it, that you do not consider renaming the Debian specific crypttab > > man page an option? > > Correct: as written earlier I believe the current manual is more likely > to be useful for our users (given initramfs-tools is our default > initramfs and someone choosing “encrypted disk” at d-i stage will end up > using cryptsetup-initramfs and not involve systemd when unlocking). > > Unfortunately systemd's crypttab(5) parsing logic and list of known > options started as a strict subset of ours (see for instance #618862), > then evolved in its own direction. (And so did we, to a lesser extent.) > However the options that are known not to be working with systemd are > marked as such in the manual.
Hi, We'd greatly appreciate it if you could please rename the downstream- specific one, given it's about initramfs then something like crypttab- initramfs[-tools] could make it clear it's specific for that use case. We need to ship the actual crypttab manpage as we are seeing users misconfigure their systems because of the wrong/missing information in the downstream crypttab manpage. We need to maintain cross-distro consistency (that's the whole point of systemd) so renaming the upstream one is not a good option. Thank you! -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
