Sorry, but I think we have a misunderstanding here. We should aim for a solution which enables both ways. With the introduction of plymouth also a bug was introduced, because the old behavior was canceled without notice. The solution with the keyscript is not feasible, as far as I understand, because this would disable plymouth completely, which is not the goal.
>From my point of view this could be easily fixed if someone who knows the >startup procedure very well could just post the necessary steps to disable >plymouth just for this "one" startup when remote unlocking is desired. My >problem is I do not know the side effects if I just do a: $killall plymouthd $killall plymouth $/bin/sh /path/to/cryptroot ... Perhaps there is a way to stop plymouth without the killall, but I simply do not know the cleanest ways. I think this bug can be fixed without a single line of code, just with a better documentation. I would write one, but I do not know the consequences... -- Remote unlocking not possible if plymouth is active (Bug or Feature?) https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/595648 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
