On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 09:31:45 -0400, Albert Hopkins wrote: > > I wasn't suggesting that. But when the main reason for sticking with > > the > > older option is that you have a working system with data in it, the > > loss > > of both of those is a good time to investigate the newer > > alternative. > > I see. I guess I don't consider one as "older". They are rather > alternatives to one another (like openssl and gnutls).
Well, encfs was around for a while before ecryptfs. Otherwise there'd have been no reason for anyone to write a FUSE filesystem to do it. > > Generally speaking I'm usually discouraged by "I currently have a > problem A, so I'll switch to B".. the old adage "Now you have two > problems." I wasn't suggesting it as a solution so much as an opportune time to try the alternative. I too am against fixing things by throwing them away, it's like reinstalling - it my get rid of the problem temporarily but you still have no idea of what the problem was or what to do should it reoccur. -- Neil Bothwick Barnum was wrong....it's more like every 30 seconds!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
