[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-19 Thread Gary Brainin
It seems like my problem may have been a different underlying cause with similar symptoms. In my case, the entry in /etc/crypttab didn't match the location of the encrypted partition. Partition is on sda3, but /etc/crypttab read: sda6_crypt UUID={uuid} none luks,discard It appears that when

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-18 Thread Gary Brainin
(Correction: previously it asked to decrypt sda3_crypt, not /dev/sda3.) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1986623 Title: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-18 Thread Gary Brainin
Success? Based only on the error message, I tried defining tmpData in /etc/crypttab. Previously, the file consisted of one line: sda6_crypt UUID={uuid} none luks,discard I added a second line: tmpData UUID={uuid} none luks,discard and re-ran update-initramfs. It still produced the other

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-18 Thread Gary Brainin
I'm getting a bit over my head, but it is seeming like there's a problem with creating a new initrd. When I decrypt (using unmkinitramfs) the initrd.img file, I see that the "good" version has a /main/cryptroot/crypttab file which appears identical to /etc/crypttab. The "bad" version has an

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-17 Thread Gary Brainin
Correction: It is not the kernel itself I was talking about, above. It's the initrd.img file associated with the kernel. Note also that replacing that file with the old version eliminates the problem (at least until some update changes it again). -- You received this bug notification because

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-16 Thread Gary Brainin
I am able to reproduce the error when I install the new 5.19.0-32 kernel. Also, when I install the package "Firmware for Linux kernel drivers," it modifies the files for the older kernels (5.15.0-60 and 5.15.0-43), making them have the same problem. The 5.15.0-60 file goes from 111,616,247 bytes

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-13 Thread Gary Brainin
Fresh install worked until I did today's recommended updates, then the problem recurred. Not sure exactly what was updated; I thought /var/log/dpkg.log was supposed to be human-readable, but mine isn't. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 1986623] Re: cryptsetup fails to decrypt root partion during boot

2023-02-11 Thread Gary Brainin
I have an Intel Core i5-4590. Also just tried a fresh install (Ubuntu 22.04) on a spare hard drive, and it boots fine using kernel 5.15.0-60-generic. Note that spare is a traditional hard drive and main drive is an SSD; next I'll try reinstalling on the SSD. -- You received this bug

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 344878] Re: file name too long when creating new file (ecryptfs_lookup: lookup_one_len() returned [-36] on lower_dentry)

2017-04-04 Thread Gary Brainin
Here's a new bug: There doesn't seem to be a way to mark comments as spam. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/344878 Title: file name too long when creating new file

[Kernel-packages] [Bug 344878] Re: file name too long when creating new file (ecryptfs_lookup: lookup_one_len() returned [-36] on lower_dentry)

2017-02-18 Thread Gary Brainin
@baltic (bugsgenerator) You're right, but the powers that be have for years refused to see the distinction between changing the way filenames are handled (which they have, I think, adequately explained the technical reasons for not doing) and providing adequate documentation and error handling