On 11/30/2003 08:36:00 PM Diego Torres wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 30, 2003 at 02:28:10PM -0500, hz...@pr... wrote:
>
>> I personally think it's a good idea to include it.
>> We have to ensure that the new loop fs really is compatible with the
>old
>> one.
>
>yes, that's what i'm doing now. i'm facing a couple of problems. now
>that
>loop is compiled as a module, it has to be included in the initrd image
>(for the normal bootup process). it's the first time i'm doing such a
>thing :)
Oh that's very confusing at the beginning, when I just think back until we
had the first working version.
But that's just something you're never working on a "normal" Linux box.
>> One thing has to be clear when you guys want to use a encrypted loop
>fs:
>> you have to enter the password during bootup, otherwise it doesn't
>make any
>> sense !
>
>well, currently with a per-user encrypted home, the password is asked
>when the
>user logs in. there is a small .bash_rc file that mounts the encrypted
>image
>on the home directory, and umounts it when logging out.
That's not bad, but that only works with SSH or console logins, correct?
>> So if you guys want to include it, ensure all the above works fine
>with the
>> current 1.1 series and then go ahead.
>
>i'm testing it. i'll ask for help on a couple of days ;) btw, we need
>loop-AES
>v1.7 because it has the patches for the 2.4.22 kernel, and a small diff
>from
>loop-AES v2.0b to patch util-linux 2.12. hope that isn't a problem.
Is v2.0b only for 2.6 Kernels ?
Heiko
|
