Hey,
On 20/05/2011 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 13:48 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
- cryptsetup is not the only userspace tool which manages dm-crypt
devices. Low-level tools like dmsetup, udev, hal; commandline tools
like cryptmount and gui applications like
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 13:55 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
yes, and this is the way it's supposed to be:
phew ;-) Just let me point this out again,..
Debian's init-script handling is broken (had to say it ;-) )
- if the cryptsetup package is removed but not purged, the initscript
will exit
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 13:48 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
- cryptsetup is not the only userspace tool which manages dm-crypt
devices. Low-level tools like dmsetup, udev, hal; commandline tools
like cryptmount and gui applications like gnome-mount etc. might
unlock/lock encrypted devices as
On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:35:12 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
h...@debian.org wrote:
Then, 'stop' tries to close all managed crypto devices and aborts *with
an error* if it cannot. 'Start' tries to open all managed crypto
devices, and aborts *with an error* if it cannot.
And 'restart'
On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:25:45 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
h...@debian.org wrote:
Because the initscript returned status 0 when there were still
cryptsetup-managed dm-crypt devices active? If it does that, it is
broken.
AFAIU just this happens right now.
Because the package allowed
Hey,
On 17/05/2011 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:35:12 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
h...@debian.org wrote:
Then, 'stop' tries to close all managed crypto devices and aborts *with
an error* if it cannot. 'Start' tries to open all managed crypto
devices, and
Hey,
On 17/05/2011 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011 22:25:45 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
h...@debian.org wrote:
Because the initscript returned status 0 when there were still
cryptsetup-managed dm-crypt devices active? If it does that, it is
broken.
AFAIU just
Hey,
On 17/05/2011 Jonas wrote:
On 17/05/2011 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
- if cryptsetup is removed OR purged, give a big fat debconf-prio-low
warning that devices a b c are still open, and cannot be closed using
cryptsetup, if the user decides to continue.
At the moment I consider
Hey,
On 15/05/2011 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
With the most recent upload (and this is the very reason why I've reopened
the bug), you can have the situation (package removed but not pruged) where
you say:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 00:24 +0200, Jonas Meurer wrote:
I think that one is the trouble spot. Christoph doesn't agree with the
way, Debian manages initscripts. They're handled as conffiles by dpkg,
and for that reason aren't removed at 'apt-get remove', only if the
package is purged.
Yes I
Christoph Anton Mitterer christoph.anton.mitte...@physik.uni-muenchen.de
writes:
Phew I guess there are already some requests against the policy open,..
both for this config-file-weirdness and for adhering to the (not so
unreasonable) LSB exit codes.
I've followed this some time and most
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
For that reason, the situation that initscripts are
still around but the daemon/application they start/stop/whatever isn't,
is quite common. And it would be absurd if initscripts would exit wit $?
!= 0 in that case.
Here the problem is
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Jonas Meurer wrote:
I tire of this thread. There are apparently bugs in the initscripts, well,
if that's correct, just get them fixed. Then, the package will not allow
itself to be removed with crypt disks still active in the first place.
It'd have to switch to
Hey,
@debian-devel: this is about a bugreport against cryptsetup. The
submitter suggests that cryptsetup should print a warning at package
removal, that locking dm-crypt devices is no longer possible.
I rather think that this is a obvious information, and making it
explicit is not required.
On
On Sun, 15 May 2011, Jonas Meurer wrote:
- But if the package is installed and removed (but not purged) some
additional caution should be taken. I'd suggest using e.g. debconf (with a
should? We hardly hand-hold our users that much. You have removed the
package, all functionality it
Hey...
I really don't wanna step on anyone's toes, especially not Jonas' (as
I'm in many cases quite satisfied and happy with his work for
cryptsetup), but sometimes I really wonder why this is packaged for
Debian at all, as it seems that it's merely intended to be a toy, and
not to be
On Sun, 15 May 2011, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
And honestly, I don't see much of a difference with the warnings
when removing the running kernel or are there any bigger
problems that modules that should be newly loaded would not be
found?!
An immediate panic makes it impossible for
On Sun, 15 May 2011 18:18:39 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
h...@debian.org wrote:
OTOH, all it takes to handle a dm-crypt device you forgot open is the
direct use of dmsetup, or simply reinstalling cryptsetup. Or a system
reboot/reset. Or a system power off.
A system power off or
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
With the most recent upload (and this is the very reason why I've reopened
the bug), you can have the situation (package removed but not pruged) where
you say:
/etc/init.d/cryptdisks stop
and it gives you just $? = 0, as
19 matches
Mail list logo
