On Mon, 2011-03-07 at 13:49 +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > This looks interesting, but the issue is complex, and at least to > me, the benefits are not clear. The benefits are IMHO: - making setups possible which do not work at all currently (e.g. lvm on top of cryptsetup)
- "unifying" the way how the different block-device packages (nbd, mdadm, lvm2, cryptsetup, etc.) handle initramfs, init-scripts, etc. - allowing clean shutdown, which is currently not possible if the rootfs is on md/dm-crypt/etc. Also allowing things like securely shutting the system down (which is currently not possible with dm-crypt. Especially as block device barriers are a complex topic, I'd also feel more safe if everything got stopped cleanly before shudown/reboot. - solving other problems on the way,... e.g. lvm2 cannot boot as it's initramfs-scripts are broken (although the maintainer ignores this) > (I never found out about this until now) ^^ I posted this once with some replies on d-d. > It's just very brittle and thus dangerous. Adding a few kilobytes to > the initramfs is a lesser concern, isn't it? Well of course,... nevertheless, keeping it small should be a long term goal =)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
