[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#597621: installation-reports: installer failed to mount when two or more encrypted partitions were set up



tags 597621 moreinfo
thanks


> I did the installation in "expert mode". Unfortunately I had two problems
> concerning the setup of LUKS encrypted partitions and filesystems. The first
> and critical one was that the installer couldn't setup more than one encrypted
> partition. Whenever I tried to specify two or more encrypted partitions the
> installer failed after formatting them, during the mounting phase. It seemed
> that the installer arbitrarily corrupted the filesystems right after
> creating/formatting them. I was trying to create four encrypted partitions:
> /dev/sdb4 (ext4) as /home (see disks layout above), /dev/sdb2 as swap,
> /dev/sda3 (ext4) as /mnt and /dev/sda2 as second swap.  Unfortunately I had to
> create only one (sdb4) and to leave the remaining three to be done after the
> system installation.

Before this bug report is reassigned to partman-crypto, could you test
the "daily builds" of D-I?

Go to http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer and take care to
pick one of the daily builds, preferrably the netboot image (*not* netinst!).


> Suggestion:
> 
> I would like to suggest that in "expert mode" the user should be able to
> choose to continue the installation process even if a previous phase has
> failed. When I experienced the major issue reported above, I was able to
> switch to a terminal and create/format/mount the encrypted partitions
> manually. But unfortunately the installation process didn't let me continue to
> the next stage because the previous stage had failed.

All internal logic of D-I is based on such dependencies. So I very
much doubt this happens before a major rewrite of many parts.

I don't really see the benefit anyway (at least in real
installs....there may be some use cases in D-I development itself but
other hacks such as putting "exit 0" at the top of the failing
component postinst, are often enough....


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: