Bug 113524

Summary: Can't mount encrypted filesystem in installer
Product: [openSUSE] SUSE LINUX 10.0 Reporter: James Ogley <riggwelter>
Component: InstallationAssignee: Thomas Fehr <fehr>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED QA Contact: Klaus Kämpf <kkaempf>
Severity: Major    
Priority: P5 - None CC: aj
Version: Beta 3   
Target Milestone: RC 3   
Hardware: i686   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Found By: Beta-Customer Services Priority:
Business Priority: Blocker: ---
Marketing QA Status: --- IT Deployment: ---
Attachments: Photo of the error message
Hope & think this is the right y2log
bzip2 compressed y2log
bzip2 compressed y2log

Description James Ogley 2005-08-27 09:14:42 UTC
When I try to mount the partition my /home is on, which is encrypted (this was
created under SUSE 9.1), it fails, suggesting the password is wrong (which it
isn't).

Will attach a photo of this happening.

This worked fine when I installed 9.3, but I wondered if it was related to the
twofishSL92 issue.  On 9.3 I had to make that amendment to cryptotab after install.
Comment 1 James Ogley 2005-08-27 09:15:37 UTC
Created attachment 47851 [details]
Photo of the error message
Comment 2 Arvin Schnell 2005-08-29 15:42:06 UTC
Please provide logs of failed installation, see:
http://www.opensuse.org/index.php/Bug_Reporting_FAQ#YaST
Comment 3 Lenz Grimmer 2005-09-02 16:22:31 UTC
I stumbled over a similar problem - see BUG#114219 for details (incl. y2logs)
Comment 4 Lukas Ocilka 2005-09-05 06:44:13 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 114219 ***
Comment 5 Thomas Fehr 2005-09-05 17:03:21 UTC
Not sure uf this is really a duplicate of 114219.
Is you encrypted /home an LVM logical volume or a software raid.
If yes this is really a duplicate of #114219 if no please attach y2log
files from /var/log/YaST2 y2log.
Comment 6 James Ogley 2005-09-05 17:22:38 UTC
Created attachment 48838 [details]
Hope & think this is the right y2log

No, it's neither an LVM logical volume or a software raid - it's just a regular
partition (/dev/hda5)
Comment 7 James Ogley 2005-09-05 17:24:47 UTC
Having uploaded that y2log, a couple of immediate thoughts:

* Oops, sorry, didn't compress it :/
* I have a feeling when I did this install I didn't even try to mount /home
because it had already failed on one install of B4.  Let me know if you need me
to do another install (at least as far as the partitioner) on this machine and
upload a new y2log.
Comment 8 Thomas Fehr 2005-09-06 08:32:57 UTC
The log does not contain any try to provide a mount point of /home to /dev/hda5.
To be able to investigate the bug I need a log where the error really happened.
Maybe it is not necessary to reinstall you can simply start "yast2 disk" in
the installed system and change the mount point and encryption state of /dev/hda5.
Comment 9 James Ogley 2005-09-06 17:07:02 UTC
Created attachment 48976 [details]
bzip2 compressed y2log

Unfortunately it worked doing it this way (I even removed /etc/cryptotab before
trying) and it seemed to work, so maybe it's that some module's not loaded at
install time? (loop_fish2 perhaps?)
Comment 10 Thomas Fehr 2005-09-07 09:12:01 UTC
No, the module loop_fish2 is there and can be loaded without a problem
in installation environment (I checked this from the logs in bug#114219).

Strange, the code to determine the encryption type is exactly the same when
running in installed system and in installation environment.

If you try installation with next release (should be RC1), please also try
to add your encrypted /home during installation and if that fails again
(which I expect), provide y2log files from this unsuccessful try.
Of course it would also help if you retry installation with beta#3, you would
not need to really do a new installation, you could abort it after the error
with integration of the encrypted /home was displayed. But if you plan to
test RC1 anyway it would be better to retry with the newer release.
Comment 11 James Ogley 2005-09-09 06:31:37 UTC
Created attachment 49327 [details]
bzip2 compressed y2log

y2log from install of RC1, the behaviour when I tried to mount /dev/hda5 was
the same as before.
Comment 12 Thomas Fehr 2005-09-12 10:16:56 UTC
Thanks for the logs, it was a missing call to "modprobe" of the corresponding 
fs module.

It seems in my test I incientially had the needed fs modules always already
loaded.