On 2015-10-18 06:36, Yonas Yanfa wrote: > Hi, > > It seems geli is the standard way of encrypting disks. It's extremely > flexible and usually recommended by the community over gbde. Moreover, > geli is mentioned a lot more in the mailing lists and forums. > > gbde's man page explicitly says that gbde is experimental and should be > considered suspect. That seems reason enough to finally depreciate and > remove it in favour of geli. > > The Encrypting Disk Partitions page in the Handbook discusses gbde > first, and describes geli as an alternative. This seems odd, shouldn't > this be the other way around? > > Is there any objection to removing gbde? How many people use gbde? When > have you used gbde over geli, and why? > > Cheers, > Yonas > It is my understanding that GDBE has some different goals, and works in different circumstances. I know Michael W. Lucas has written about it in his books. While I think it isn't a bad idea to put GELI first in the handbook, I don't see any reason to remove gdbe. -- Allan Jude
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:00 UTC