On 2015-04-17 15:44, Martin Pitt wrote: > Hello all, > > Cyril Brulebois [2015-04-17 14:15 +0200]: >> I tried to follow the code path in Ubuntu, which offers this option, to >> track down where the offset can come from; and see whether Debian was >> affected. I didn't mean to imply that Debian proposes the same option, >> as it does not. > > Ah ok, that explains the confusion. So let's fix ecryptfs in a > post-release update, I'll file a bug with the references and > explanations. > >> systemd | 215-16 | testing >> systemd | 215-16 | unstable > > -17 uploaded with the originally attached patch. The only difference > is the s/UNRELEASED/unstable/ and the timestamp in the changelog. > > Thanks, and sorry for the late timing again! > > Martin >
Hi, Just to clarify, are we still intending to do a systemd update prior to Jessie with -17 and then now also a p-u (i.e. for 8.1) for ecryptfs? If we are /not/ pulling systemd for Jessie release next release, we can document the issue for the release notes (possibly as a "non-standard" setup given d-i in Debian does not create this kind of disks, if I understand the discussion correctly). Thanks, ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/55312cee.5000...@thykier.net
