Install Code Check

Question

Before beginning I'll have set up the hard drive with a 25gb Windows FAT partition on dev/sda3 and 25 GB free space remaining.
Creates Linux system with all partitions including /boot in lvm group, and encrypts /home /var and /root
NOTE: Grub as installed in normal Arch setup will not work. Grub2 will have to be installed later
modprobe dm-crypt
modprobe aes-i586
Boot the live cd, then login and.
cfdisk /dev/sda
Create a lvm partition type in free space
pvcreate /dev/sda4
create a physical volume
vgcreate archvol01 /dev/sda4
lvcreate -L  64MB archvol01 -n lvolboot
create boot partition
lvcreate -L 3G archvol01 -n lvolvar
create var partition
lvcreate -L 12G archvol01 -n lvolroot
create root partition
lvcreate -L 11GB archvol01 lvolhome
create home partition
lvcreate -C y -L 4G archvol01 -n lvolswap
cryptsetup -c aes-xts-plain -y -s 512 luksFormat /dev/archvol01/lvolhome
encrypts home partition
cryptsetup -c aes-xts-plain -y -s 512 luksFormat /dev/archvol01/lvolroot
encrypts root partition
cryptsetup -c aes-xts-plain -y -s 512 luksFormat /dev/archvol01/lvolvar
encrypts var partition
cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/archvol01/lvolhome
opens lvolhome
cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/archvol01/lvolroot
open lvolroot
cryptsetup luksOpen /dev/archvol01/lvolvar
opens lvolvar
start arch installer
set timezone etc,
skip partition/autoprepare hard disk, go straight to select filesystem mountpoints
You need to answer the question Do you need support for booting from encrypted volumes? with yes.
/etc/mkinitcpio.conf
Alter this line:
HOOKS="base udev autodetect pata scsi sata filesystems"
to this:
HOOKS="base udev autodetect pata scsi sata encrypt lvm2 filesystems"
Edit /etc/rc.conf from USELVM="no" to USELVM="yes"
Is it more secure to use aes-xts-plain or  aes-lrw-benb or  aes-cbc-essiv:sha256?
Anyone  see a problem with the code besides having /boot in a lvm group?
Thanks for comments
Sources:
Arch Wiki
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Sys … r_dm-crypt
Circle of Friends Blog
http://www.pindarsign.de/webblog/?p=767
Last edited by duke11235 (2009-10-18 22:05:54)

Answer 1

The ability to detect the jre at the update level, as well as the ability to install a specific version are only present if the DT plugins are installed.
These plugins only exist for windows and are only part of the 6u10 (1.6.0_10) versions of java.
The javascript you show uses an undefined minimumVersion variable.
also note, you cannot use the wildcard '1.5.0*' in the call to isWebStartInstalled (which takes minimumVersion arg)
if fixed, this code would still not work as you want, since clients with 1.6.0 or later would sail straight thru and launch.
I suggest replacing isWebStartInstalled() with deployJava.versionCheck('1.5.0*') .
then on systems with the plugin installed, if no 1.5.0* version is installed, the latest 1.5.0_XX will be installed before launching the app.
(assuming the app has also <j2se version=1.5/> or equiv.)
on systems w/o plugins installed, the latest version of java will be installed, and it will be up to javaws auto download to get 1.5.0* version.
this could still have problems, especially on platforms not supporting the plugins (non-windows) , since code keeps checking for '1.5.0*', and installing only latest, so you would want to wrap install with something to prevent repeated attempts to install:
if (deployJava.versionCheck('1.6.0+') && !deployJava.isPluginInstalled()) {
---- don't do any install here - ---
/Andy