[arch-projects] [mkinitcpio] systemd in initramfs

[Tom Gundersen]

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Tom Gundersen <teg at jklm.no> wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Thanks for your work on all this, I was hoping someone would pick this up.
>
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 12:45 AM, Thomas Bächler <thomas at archlinux.org> wrote:
>> Am 17.08.2013 17:08, schrieb Thomas Bächler:
>>> 3) encrypt: I created the sd-encrypt hook, you can find it here:
>>> https://paste.xinu.at/8xUYPI/. This changes the command line syntax, the
>>> new syntax can be found in the manpage for systemd-cryptsetup-generator.
>>> However, the syntax is less powerful than before - for that reason, I
>>> added /etc/crypttab.initrd as /etc/crypttab to the initrd, which should
>>> support almost everything. There were some problems with adding the same
>>> crypttab for initrd and the main system, but that may be my stupiditiy -
>>> I hope the separate crypttab is something we can get rid of.
>>
>> Okay, this one has the wrong help, but otherwise it's what I'm going to
>> use now: https://paste.xinu.at/0PXjlV/
>>
>> It now adds /etc/crypttab to initramfs. You can make sure that only the
>> necessary devices are activated in initramfs by using the rd.luks.uuid=
>> options on the command line. You can also use rd.luks.uuid= without any
>> crypttab entries, but then you can't set extra options (for me:
>> allow_discards).
>
> We should make it possible to do this without having to put
> /etc/crypttab in the initramfs.
>
> I guess we basically want to mimic what the fstab generator does: 1)
> allow options to be specified on the kernel commandline and,
> optionally, 2) allow further options to be read from
> /sysroot/etc/cryttab once that has been mounted.
>
> For the first, we would need to extend the syntax, perhaps to
> {rd.,}luks.uuid.options= or something like that.

Hm, that syntax doesn't make sense. I meant something like
"{rd.,}luks.options=${UUID}=${options}".

> The second could
> obviously not be used for partitions used to mount the rootfs (but
> only /usr), so maybe not that useful, but I guess it makes sense to be
> consistent.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Tom