On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:01:33 +0200 Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinri...@online.de> wrote:
> Am Samstag 20 Juni 2009 09:37:24 schrieb Mike Kazantsev: > > > Dirk Heinrichs <dirk.heinri...@online.de> wrote: > > > > I believe there's "after device-mapper" line already in lvm-2.02.45, so > > > > it should run fine, but as an additional precaution I have dm-crypt > > > > script at sysinit runlevel, which starts device-mapper and dm-crypt > > > > before lvm or even it's runlevel (boot). > > > > > > That's not needed, it should be sufficient to have them all in the boot > > > runlevel: > > > > So LVM would start before dmcrypt? Great. > > Yes. No, because encrypted partitions hold LVM volumes as well. > > > > It makes sense for me, since some lvm pv's (not root) are actually on > > > > encrypted partitions, although I mount these even earlier, but should > > > > initrd become incompatible w/ latest kernel, dm-crypt should do the job > > > > instead. > > > > > > No, it does not make sense. You don't even need an initrd. > > > > I do, but mainly for other purposes. > > Which? Keeping my mini-distro there, which I use as instant-boot router w/o mounting anything. Why not keep it on /boot, separate partition or separate initrd? I do, each with a bit different setup and purpose. > > Mounting encrypted partitions from there is a bonus and while root is > > not encrypted (although it doesn't even holds most configuration > > from /etc) it is an LVM volume. > > > Can linux boot from lvm root w/o initrd these days? > > Yes, it always could. As long as /boot is a separate partition one can put > the > same stuff into it. Much simpler to setup. Simplier to setup prehaps, but I find it simplier to keep my initrds contents in git branches w/ one-click build and deploy script, which I find simplier to maintain than ten different paths under /boot. But this goes completely offtopic. It's not like I seek suggestions for my setup, it works perfectly already. -- Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
