Tim Chase <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2026-03-07 17:38, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > Placing a softraid key disk on top of a vnd doesn't make sense. > > It allows unlocking a primary drive with a password, availing the > keyfile/key"disk" that then unlocks subsequent disks (rather than > needing to enter a password for each of the subsequent disks). > Whether it makes sense to you or not, the process (as documented in the > initial email) works exactly as I'd hoped as long as I use the vnconfig > method. And even *mostly* works if I use the mount_vnd method, I just > can't destroy/unconfigure the device with `vnconfig -u`. > > So I'm trying to figure out why the difference in behavior.
No you are asking other people to fix something for you that noone ever intended to work. If someone supplied a diff which required softraid components to be *physical disks*, your question becomes moot.
