OK. But I hope we are not renaming the LUKS class.. ever.
----- "David Lehman" <dlehman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This adds the newly established passphrase to all preexisting LUKS
> devices so that the system can be booted by entering a single
> passphrase.
> ---
> storage/__init__.py | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/storage/__init__.py b/storage/__init__.py
> index 8678b6e..f12c6c3 100644
> --- a/storage/__init__.py
> +++ b/storage/__init__.py
> @@ -232,6 +232,7 @@ class Storage(object):
>
> def doIt(self):
> self.devicetree.processActions()
> + self.doEncryptionPassphraseRetrofits()
>
> # now set the boot partition's flag
> try:
> @@ -744,6 +745,27 @@ class Storage(object):
>
> return lvtemplate
>
> + def doEncryptionPassphraseRetrofits(self):
> + """ Add the global passphrase to all preexisting LUKS
> devices.
> +
> + This establishes a common passphrase for all encrypted
> devices
> + in the system so that users only have to enter one
> passphrase
> + during system boot.
> + """
> + if not self.retrofitPassphrase:
> + return
> +
> + for device in self.devices:
> + if device.format.type == "luks" and \
> + device.format._LUKS__passphrase !=
> self.encryptionPassphrase:
> + log.info("adding new passphrase to preexisting
> encrypted "
> + "device %s" % device.path)
> + try:
> +
> device.format.addPassphrase(self.encryptionPassphrase)
> + except CryptoError:
> + log.error("failed to add new passphrase to
> existing "
> + "device %s" % device.path)
> +
> def sanityCheck(self):
> """ Run a series of tests to verify the storage
> configuration.
>
> --
> 1.6.0.6
>
> _______________________________________________
> Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
> Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
