From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <glkdd-dm-crypt@m.gmane.org>
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mail.server123.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Fri,  5 Feb 2016 16:23:40 +0100 (CET)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
 (envelope-from <glkdd-dm-crypt@m.gmane.org>) id 1aRhzy-0003mq-TM
 for dm-crypt@saout.de; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:08:39 +0100
Received: from c-50-158-72-35.hsd1.il.comcast.net ([50.158.72.35])
 by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
 id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:08:38 +0100
Received: from rnicholsNOSPAM by c-50-158-72-35.hsd1.il.comcast.net with local
 (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
 for <dm-crypt@saout.de>; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 16:08:38 +0100
From: Robert Nichols <rnicholsNOSPAM@comcast.net>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 09:08:28 -0600
Message-ID: <n92dtd$hv9$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <CAFnMBaRfu93jkgmZ_vLDChF7Uv-dCE6dNN6YkSxU3EFvn8iHtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <56B20C05.7080307@gmail.com> <56B25914.5090204@whgl.uni-frankfurt.de>
 <56B30DE8.1060502@gmail.com> <20160204092017.GA25029@yeono.kjorling.se>
 <56B37D92.2030306@whgl.uni-frankfurt.de> <20160204172311.GB20874@tansi.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <20160204172311.GB20874@tansi.org>
Subject: Re: [dm-crypt] The future of disk encryption with LUKS2
List-Id: <dm-crypt.saout.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/options/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.saout.de/pipermail/dm-crypt/>
List-Post: <mailto:dm-crypt@saout.de>
List-Help: <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt>,
 <mailto:dm-crypt-request@saout.de?subject=subscribe>
To: dm-crypt@saout.de

On 02/04/2016 11:23 AM, Arno Wagner wrote:
> On the other hand, resizing a Luks container with a
> filesystem in there without killing that filesystem is
> already complicated enough that I usually just recomend
> a backup and recreation instead of a resize.

Making an already difficult process more complex isn't going to
win many friends.  Sounds like what you need is a "--resizefs"
option like the one LVM's lvresize uses to invoke fsadm(8).

-- 
Bob Nichols     "NOSPAM" is really part of my email address.
                 Do NOT delete it.