Project

General

Profile

Feature #6786

Be consistent when checking if persistence is enabled in tails-additional-software

Added by anonym over 5 years ago. Updated 3 days ago.

Status:
In Progress
Priority:
Low
Assignee:
Category:
Persistence
Target version:
-
Start date:
02/27/2014
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:
Starter:
Yes
Affected tool:
Additional Software Packages

Description

Currently it checks whether /live/persistence/TailsData_unlocked exists, which works, but it's inconsistent with how we check it in other places. See e.g. how it's done in persistence_is_enabled() of config/chroot_local-includes/usr/local/lib/tails-shell-library/tails_greeter.sh.

This is definitely something for the Tails python library (#6452).


Related issues

Related to Tails - Feature #6452: Factor out stuff into a Tails Python library Confirmed 11/29/2013
Related to Tails - Feature #14568: Additional Software Packages Resolved 12/11/2013 06/26/2018

History

#1 Updated by anonym over 5 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)

#2 Updated by intrigeri about 5 years ago

  • Category changed from 196 to Persistence

#3 Updated by intrigeri over 3 years ago

  • Affected tool set to Additional Software Packages

#4 Updated by u over 1 year ago

#5 Updated by alant about 1 year ago

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • Assignee changed from alant to anonym
  • QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Info Needed

This is now done in function has_unlocked_persistence of submodules/pythonlib/tailslib/persistence.py.

It checks for /live/persistence/TailsData_unlocked which means the persistence is actually unlocked, which looks better to me than checking if persistence has been enabled in the greeter (/var/lib/live/config/tails.persistence has TAILS_PERSISTENCE_ENABLED) which is what config/chroot_local-includes/usr/local/lib/tails-shell-library/tails-greeter.sh does.

#6 Updated by u about 1 year ago

  • Assignee changed from anonym to alant

@alant: I'm unsure what kind of info you need on this ticket. And it is very unlikely you'll get that info from anonym. Please reassign this to intrigeri for review and/or further instructions who could review it. Thank you.

#7 Updated by alant about 1 year ago

  • Assignee changed from alant to intrigeri

u wrote:

@alant: I'm unsure what kind of info you need on this ticket. And it is very unlikely you'll get that info from anonym. Please reassign this to intrigeri for review and/or further instructions who could review it. Thank you.

This is a 4 years old ticket, asking:

- to do the check in the python library > done
to do the same check as in the greeter shell library -> I don't think it's a good idea, see my previous comment. But I may miss something. What do you think?

#8 Updated by intrigeri about 1 year ago

  • Assignee changed from intrigeri to alant

alant wrote:

It checks for /live/persistence/TailsData_unlocked which means the persistence is actually unlocked, which looks better to me than checking if persistence has been enabled in the greeter (/var/lib/live/config/tails.persistence has TAILS_PERSISTENCE_ENABLED) which is what config/chroot_local-includes/usr/local/lib/tails-shell-library/tails-greeter.sh does.

Why does it look better to you?

#9 Updated by intrigeri 4 months ago

  • QA Check deleted (Info Needed)

#10 Updated by intrigeri 3 days ago

Thinking about it again, I can see pros & cons to both implementations. But IMO we should have one implementation, whichever it is: especially after #16935 is done, it'll feel awkward to have two competing implementations. So what about this:

  1. Add whatever code is needed in the Python version to support all our shell use cases (see git grep persistence_is_enabled).
  2. Make the persistence_is_enabled* shell functions call the Python code.
  3. Profit :)

?

Also available in: Atom PDF