Re: activeate encrypted devices.

[Joel Granados <jgranado redhat com>]

Don't have a quick answer to this one.  At first glance it *does* look better than my original idea.  I hadn't noticed that the dispatcher changed with the findRootParts function.  I'll revisit it tomorrow. if in need of commit before that, I would go ahead with dlehmans pathc.

Regards.
----- "Dave Lehman" <dlehman redhat com> wrote:

> > Looked at this a little closer and found out that we are ignoring
> the call of the function that checks for root if the ks file contains
> install.
> > the patch is attached.
> > review appreciated.
> > 
> 
> I worry what consequences this approach will have. For one thing,
> findRootParts will alter the dispatcher's step list. A simple fix
> might
> be to add the call back into setFromDisk, but only if we're doing
> kickstart:
> 
> diff --git a/partitions.py b/partitions.py
> index baf8faf..d266605 100644
> --- a/partitions.py
> +++ b/partitions.py
> @@ -369,6 +369,8 @@ class Partitions:
>          """Clear the delete list and set self.requests to reflect
> disk."""
>          self.deletes = []
>          self.requests = []
> +        if diskset.anaconda.isKickstart:
> +            self.getEncryptedDevices(diskset)
>          labels = diskset.getInfo()
>          drives = diskset.disks.keys()
>          drives.sort()
> 
> 
> This is untested, so it might cause problems as well.
> 
> Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
> Anaconda-devel-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list

-- 
Joel Andres Granados
Red Hat / Brno Czech Republic