X-Original-To: alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org Received: from magnesium.8pit.net (magnesium.8pit.net [45.76.88.171]) by lists.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2A8C5C4BBF for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2017 21:44:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost (dslb-092-077-029-120.092.077.pools.vodafone-ip.de [92.77.29.120]) by magnesium.8pit.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 3f83e504 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO); Wed, 14 Jun 2017 23:44:35 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 23:44:34 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6ren?= Tempel To: alpine-aports@lists.alpinelinux.org Cc: OtherthanthatIdon'treallycare@francium, what's@francium Subject: Re: [alpine-aports] [PATCH] main/mkinitfs: backport cryptdiscards patch Message-ID: <20170614214434.GA17311@francium> References: <20170610100553.3112-1-soeren+git@soeren-tempel.net> <20170612113737.0d96dd0a@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> <20170612105504.GA22141@francium> <20170614152710.4f52282a@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> X-Mailinglist: alpine-aports Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20170614152710.4f52282a@ncopa-desktop.copa.dup.pw> On 14.06.17, Natanael Copa wrote: > What do you think? Should we go for: >=20 > cryptroot=3D$device cryptdm=3D$dmname cyptdiscards=3Dyes cryptheader=3D= $header cryptoffset=3D$offset >=20 > or should we do: >=20 > cryptdevice=3D$device:$dmname:allow-discards cryptkey=3D$header:$offset Honestly I don't have a strong opinion on this. I believe the latter is harder to read and besides we would break backwards compatibility if we would switch to this scheme. Do you have an opinion on this? Would you like to switch to the latter? S=F6ren. --- Unsubscribe: alpine-aports+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-aports+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---