In the custom partitioning stage, after selecting an existing partition, which contains a luks encrypted (ext4 in this case) filesystem, the display incorrectly displays Type: Journalised FS: Btrfs The partition table, shown by sfdisk has /dev/sda5 104843264 171943694 67100431 83 Linux $ udevadm info --name /dev/sda5|grep FS_TYPE E: ID_FS_TYPE=crypto_LUKS The use button is correctly displayed, and works, so this is only a bug about what is displayed, which might confuse a user. This problem is new with the RC version of diskdrake. Reproducible: Steps to Reproduce:
CC: (none) => ennael1, tmbWhiteboard: (none) => 3RC
confirming on mga4b2, install mga4b2 + updates: as test made a encrypted ext4 partition in a LVM, works, but is shown as btrfs. But it is worse: diskdrake fail to remove it -> rising priority
Priority: Normal => HighCC: (none) => friHardware: i586 => All
Problems may be related. Failing to edit or remove encrypted drive under LVM have i think never worked for me and I am not alone, bug 5345.
Using encryption is for many users very valuable to protect private keys, mail, documents, corporate info. LVM is valuable to manage disk space and possibly snapshots for consistent backups Unfortunately i have more often then not had problems when i try to use encryption and LVM. Golden workaround rule: * After install never add or remove any encrypted partition * Changing partitions inside a encrypted LVM works almost always. Make sure to not make partitions in LVM too big, but enlarge any that need it later, also on running system while mounted (remember to first backup and cross fingers) I understand developers are busy every release to just get it just work, but if time magically emerges i think it would be good to rewrite diskdrake / installer from scratch...
Has there been progress in this issue in Mageia 5?
Keywords: (none) => NEEDINFO
(In reply to Samuel Verschelde from comment #4) > Has there been progress in this issue in Mageia 5? Apart from this question, there was no action in this report since 2013-12-28 @ Morgan Is this bug still valid with Mga5 and/or current cauldron / mga6dev1 ?
CC: (none) => marja11
Ill see if i get time with the dev isos if i have a system i can play with.
Works for me as of current Cauldron (both regular ext4 & LVM)
Status: NEW => RESOLVEDResolution: (none) => FIXED