-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 01/21/08 16:51, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, Thomas Flaig wrote: >> Am Montag, 21. Januar 2008 15:50 schrieb Ron Johnson: >>> On 01/21/08 03:16, Thomas Flaig wrote: >>>> Am Samstag, 19. Januar 2008 03:30 schrieb Ron Johnson: >>>>> I think it's foolish to have a swap *partition* in the 21st century. >>>> But there are other reasons for a swap partition in the 21st century: >>> You miss the distinction between swap partition and swap *file*. >> Ok: > > But I don't, and I really prefer a swap partition. It is much easier and > faster to encrypt it to an ephemeral 64-bit blowfish key (fast, good enough > for my modest security needs) using dm-crypt than to use an encrypting > filesystem.
Good point. I only GPG encrypt the few files that I really care about, though. As I see it, the problem with swap partitions is their static nature. (Once you partition the whole disk, it's partitioned. Of course, you can leave some un-allocated space on the disk, but that seems a waste.) So, if a year down the road, you add more RAM and commensurately want to increase the swap space, you're stuck. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate vegetables!" unknown -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHlS1US9HxQb37XmcRApBTAKCwGA1hEYqkYNGCQ0QsmS6zXzvEoACgjz3y fIeMi23qPUuIQk+zjQ/XaJs= =q3FT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
