On 06/19/2012 10:56 AM Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
On 19.06.2012 16:17, Milan Broz wrote:
On 06/19/2012 03:54 PM, Thomas Bächler wrote:
I find the option name --without-activation to be quite long and hard to
type. Is there any reason why you didn't choose '--dry-run' as you first
suggested?
Actually I wrote --dry-run, --no-activate, --no-activation, --without-activation
on paper ... and then asked someone here what's the best:)
Well, I think this option will be rarely used and I guess it is mainly for use
in scripts. Option name says exactly what it is doing.
It says what technically happens, not was is the intent of using said
option. (You have to read the man-page, at least in the git-version of a
few minutes ago the intent is right after the technicallity)
I think intent is much easier to understand.
So i'd vote for: --test-passphrase
I'd agree, especially since the entire command would then read:
cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/sdc x --test-passphrase -T 1
To read in documentation, on the other hand:
cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/sdc x --without-activation -T 1
I would be asking, "What is not being activated?" So it's very
ambiguous. On the other hand, "--test-passphrase" is much clearer, much
easier to understand.
Would there still be a delay between invocations?
_______________________________________________
dm-crypt mailing list
dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx
http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
