From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.saout.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.saout.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZEscpxaYAWnB for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:25:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com (mail-ee0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.saout.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:25:49 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e49so5943024eek.2 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2012 04:25:49 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50E032CA.1010004@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2012 13:25:46 +0100 From: Milan Broz MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20121227095229.GA9356@tansi.org> <20121228150430.GA17491@tansi.org> <50DDF171.1080807@gmail.com> <96a12d6b77c3f72a240b489e3ceefa4a.squirrel@ssl.verfeiert.org> <50E00BDF.2000109@gmail.com> <20121230105308.GA13288@tansi.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] Avoiding fsck.ext4 destruction of crypto_luks data List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de On 12/30/2012 01:08 PM, Sven Eschenberg wrote: >> I also found that "wipefs" >> does not remove matadata 0.90 signatures from md components (located >> at the end. I still use them because I like kernel-level autodetection >> and my arrays are small), also added warning about that. Usual util-linux maintainer response is "send a patch" :-) wipefs must work (e.g. anaconda installer depends on the proper sig. erase) so it is a bug somewhere. Do you have reproducer? (only 0.9 metadata end-of-disk format?) Milan