On Sunday 20 August 2006 22:56, David Härdeman wrote: > >Support in graphical installer would be nice to have before the > > release. > > What needs to be done? We're missing an entropy plug-in for the gtk frontend. > >> As for lvm, I don't see any new bugs against partman-lvm, what > >> issues are you referring to? > > > >The issues are mainly in partman-auto-lvm which partman-auto-crypto is > >based on (and thus also affected by). > > I assume you're referring to the "should automatically delete existing > LVM" issue? Yes, and #368633 and #381244. > No, with p-a-c we have disk <-> crypto <-> lvm (in order to allow one Ah, that changes everything. I was assuming the other way around... IMO this should be made very clear in the dialog where a disk is selected for partman-auto-crypto (and in the installation guide), so that if it is not what the user wants, he can use <Go Back> to abandon the choice. The separate flag also does not really add any value if that is the case. In fact, it makes the whole discussion rather irrelevant... > That seems like a good solution. It would also protect against > hypotetic situations such as if grub would gain LVM support and /boot > would be marked $lvmok. Hmm, you'd still have to find a way to support creating multiple LVM volumes though. I'd rather suggest making sure in the p-a-c code that an $lvmok flag on /boot is ignored. See also #350450 though...
Attachment:
pgpATr2Lxd3kE.pgp
Description: PGP signature