-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 255
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
rename GRUB_RESCUE to DEVEL_GRUB_RESCUE #938
Comments
I am thinking about an even more explanatory name Unfortunately this week I must leave early into the weekend ;-) |
Regarding "poll to drop or keep the GRUB_RESCUE": Good idea to ask if GRUB_RESCUE is actually needed I do not menn if it is "nice to have", I mean if GRUB_RESCUE Regarding "renaming GRUB_RESCUE": Initially I thought renaming GRUB_RESCUE could be I think it is sufficient when I only make the documentation In particular bevause nowadays GRUB_RESCUE is I will make a pull request with better documentation |
…_clearly_issue938 document GRUB_RESCUE meaning more clearly by more explanatory comments in default.conf (the only place where GRUB_RESCUE is documented in the rear source files), see #938
With #941 |
For me GRUB_RESCUE does not work # usr/sbin/rear -d -D mkbackup ... ERROR: GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD needs to be set. Run grub2-mkpasswd-pbkdf2 to generate pbkdf2 hash regardless that there is in usr/share/rear/conf/default.conf GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD="REAR" The rear log file shows: + source /root/rear/usr/share/rear/output/default/94_grub2_rescue.sh ... ++ [[ ! REAR == \g\r\u\b\.\p\b\k\d\f\2 ]] ++ Error 'GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD needs to be set. Run grub2-mkpasswd-pbkdf2 to generate pbkdf2 hash' I think in output/default/94_grub2_rescue.sh the code if [[ ! "${GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD:0:11}" == 'grub.pbkdf2' ]]; then Error "GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD needs to be set. Run grub2-mkpasswd-pbkdf2 to generate pbkdf2 hash" fi is plain wrong. First I will fix the GRUB_RESCUE functionality so that it works |
Yes, I also found this out by reverse-engineering the code ;-) echo -e "$GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD\n$GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD" | $grub_mkpasswd_binary | grep -o 'grub.pbkdf2.*' to generate a PBKDF2 hash from a plain text Is there a security reason why GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD I mean what would be the real security when the user I think nothing in the rear code can actually hinder the user |
With #942 The drawback in its current form is Note in particular that before #942 |
In #703 Only a blind guess: Therefore I is perhaps an useful fail-safe feature when one |
Now I'm starting to get better picture. It looks like GRUB_RESCUE (which should be rather called GRUB2_RESCUE) and GRUB_RESCUE_PASSWORD are tightly bind together. So you can't have unprotected ReaR entry. This is IMHO not correct.
As stated in comment to issue #703, when I did test on Centos only password protected entry was that one ReaR created, but the behavior might differ on SuSE. This however does not change the fact, that my Centos was not able to boot "out of the box" (I had to use some manual reconfiguration in grub shell to make it work). @jsmeix @gdha But first I'd like to know whether it gives any sense to work further on this code as its future is unclear. The poll might be a good idea here. |
With my better description of GRUB_RESCUE Because GRUB_RESCUE is disabled by default, What I like most about the GRUB_RESCUE feature is Because of this I think the GRUB_RESCUE feature With the GRUB_RESCUE feature normal end-users For normal end-users who do not have compatible On the other hand the GRUB_RESCUE feature But then the GRUB_RESCUE feature does no longer Therefore in the end the GRUB_RESCUE feature Because in business environments recovery speed matters To even more increase recovery speed the server admin Bottom line: |
@gozora With my current code in #942 But if you already have a /etc/grub.d/01_users file |
@jsmeix yes, I've tested this yesterday and can confirm thatit works fine. |
My current #942 When there are no objections |
With the now merged #942 |
See the follow-up issue #946 |
rename GRUB_RESCUE to DEVEL_GRUB_RESCUE
to make it transparent that this is a development
and testing feature and not meant for production.
For background information see
#935
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: