From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mr Dash Four Subject: Re: crypt-cleanup.sh question Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 15:16:05 +0100 Message-ID: <4CC83425.2010706@googlemail.com> References: <4CC6C571.8010406@googlemail.com> <4CC6E7C1.1050703@googlemail.com> <4CC7F15C.7090600@redhat.com> <4CC815E4.4060705@googlemail.com> <4CC82448.80403@redhat.com> <4CC82652.3090500@googlemail.com> <4CC82B0B.30208@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id :disposition-notification-to:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5VDQWyRm9C5Ann5K8UlU6IVpYdJfvq04pV4jlfKqFds=; b=O2Zy/wiqCTrA7ZHl6tY0hucVR5TSE+DXpwJF66a0FH/fTge0Ts5E8/ctnDbUx6lETI OmeHe9Ad+e7aF0KCMa1SDGgTw+OeKxNrw+uuuspT+b/GWFju2tvAADg9RAsYJ/PST6iO tPkfOM8LcUkStwOnlkYZlzrRzsgg2qBenH37g= In-Reply-To: <4CC82B0B.30208-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Harald Hoyer Cc: initramfs >> On a side note: I thought rd_LUKS_UUID, rd_LUKS_KEYPATH, >> rd_LUKS_KEYDEV and >> rd_NO_LUKS are sort of 'deprecated' in favour of the new rd.luks.* >> format - is >> that not the case? > > yes, they will be. When is this planned? >> Another query - is there any particular reason why all rd_LUKS_UUID >> need to be >> mapped to luks-UUID? I'd rather be able to choose a more meaningful >> name than >> the 'standard' luks-UUID - just a thought. > > hmm, yes/no... I like meaningful symlinks :) OK, how about "luks-" then? ;-)