On Monday 30 May 2005 23:47, Gregory Seidman wrote: > Symbolic links only contain the path. There is no inode information > involved. This is not, however, the best way to deal with an encrypted > disk. I much prefer to put LVM on top of an encrypted loop device to > provide whatever partitions I need, and mount them in place rather than > having symlinks lying around.
Hmmm, that's interesting. It would certainly be a more technically interesting solution, but does it have any real advantages, for someone like me who doesn't bother with seperate home partitions etc. usually? > What you probably > want to do is to write a script around it to create the loop (which > requests the password) and attempt to mount; if the mount fails, the loop > should be taken down and the process should be attempted again. Yes, I was thinking of something like that. Thanks :) -- Lee. Please do not CC replies directly to me. I'll read them on the list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
