On 2/8/08, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > >> On 2/4/08, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> 3) misc stuff - I've not yet tested ext4 over an encrypted block device, > >>> or even over an lvm volume. There may be some stack issues on x86 boxes > >>> still, I'm working on slimming that down. I hope that more real-world > >>> use will shake out any remaining problems. > >> I temporarily lost my sanity and tried installing ex4 over an > >> encrypted lvm volume. Of course, it didn't work, > > Oh, ye of little faith! :) I had enough faith to try :)!!! > >> I get the following > >> message when it tried to mount the root partition: > > FWIW, if you did this with all rawhide bits, it *should* have worked; > (rawhide) anaconda should have called (rawhide) mkfs.ext3 in a manner > which should have set the flag that the (rawhide) kernel is looking for. > > This was not the case? No, anaconda would have been from the F9 alpha DVD, so probably wouldn't have done that. I think that I shot myself in the foot by booting off of the F9 alpha DVD and then adding a rawhide http repo to pull in the latest bits. I was trying out your advice to use a rescue CD (actually the F9 alpha DVD again) to use the latest debugfs to set the flag, but that is complicated by the fact that my physical volume is encrypted. Does the rescue mode have the tools necessary to mount encrypted partitions? Anyway, I think I'll get a boot.iso from rawhide and reinstall using that... Jeff -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
