On Mon, February 17, 2014 16:02, Thomas Bächler wrote: > Am 17.02.2014 15:39, schrieb Arno Wagner: >> That this is in a c-file, not an easily changed shell- >> skript, already explains quite a bit of what is wrong >> with systemd. > > Besides the fact that this is completely off-topic: > > You could use the same argument on cryptsetup and claim that it should > be a shell script. Why isn't it? If I want 'cryptsetup luksOpen's prompt > to change, I need to change it in cryptsetup and recompile. If it was a > script, I could easily edit it. As you might have realized, cryptsetup provides ways to not show it's own prompt and offers various ways of providing a key/password, so using a script with your own prompt is straight forward. Of course doing it all in a shell script is impossible, I assume you know that already and why. > > It's *precisely* your argument. (Of course, it completely ignores that > the next system update would overwrite it, shell script or binary). No it is not, as cryptsetup is a minimal tool doing one job which can not be achived by the shell itself, while offering various ways to provide the key and as such can easily be wrapped. While binaries get replaced during an update, shell scripts don't. (Matter of fact, it depends on the dist, so it's up to the user to choose) > > Really, please stop inventing weird arguments against things that you > don't use, are not interested in and don't know anything about - and > keep it on-topic. Arno merely gave a side remark as well as the answer on how to achieve what was asked, nothing wrong here. > >> Pity. With a sane init system, it would just be a change to >> some shell-skript, i.e. 2 minutes with a text editor. > > Until the next system update - and then you edit it again. System > maintenance like it is done in 2014! System updates in 2014 do not forcefully revert user changes! -Sven _______________________________________________ dm-crypt mailing list dm-crypt@xxxxxxxx http://www.saout.de/mailman/listinfo/dm-crypt
