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

Bug#849400: debian-installer: LUKS on rootfs and boot



Package: debian-installer
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

Debian installer refuse me to install entire system (including /boot) on
one encrypted partition. It shows me this red fatal error message:

  [!!] Partition disks

  Encryption configuration failure

  You have selected the root file system to be stored on an encrypted partition. This
  feature requires a separate /boot partition on which the kernel and initrd can be stored.

  You should go back and setup a /boot partition.

There are two buttons <Go Back> and <Continue> but both buttons go
back and refuse to continue...

Then I tried to have separate /boot and separate / partitions, both
LUKS encrypted. But Debian installer again refused to install such
configuration. It show me another red fatal error message:

  [!!] Partition disks

  Encrypted configuration failure

  You have selected the /boot file system to be stored on an encrypted partition. This is
  not possible because the boot loader would be unable to load the kernel and initrd.
  Continuing now would result in an installation that cannot be used.

  You should go back and choose a non-encrypted partition for he /boot file system.

Again there are two buttons: <Go Back> and <Continue> and again both go
back and does not allow me to process changes and continue.

And that error message is incorrect. Grub2 has already supports for
accessing LUKS partitions. Just add GRUB_ENABLE_CRYPTODISK=y (or in
older versions GRUB_CRYPTODISK_ENABLE=y) to /etc/default/grub.

Debian installer should allow users to install system on fully
encrypted disk (also with /boot) and should not force users to have
always /boot unencrypted.

At least expert users should be able to skip that error message and
continue installation as error message is not truth anymore.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@gmail.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: