Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.server123.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:14:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from gmx.com ([185.100.85.61]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.174]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MN1Gu-1ckdg71tHc-006htA for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:14:31 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 19:14:28 +0100 From: "G.raud" Message-ID: <20170215181428.GB28234@gmx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [dm-crypt] cryptsetup manpage: misleading/imprecise description of --size for resize List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dm-crypt@saout.de Incriminated part of the cryptsetup manpage: " If --size (in sectors) is not specified, the size of the underlying block device is used. " In fact the size of the underlying block device is used _to compute_ the _maximum_ size that can be made available, which in case of LUKS is not the whole block device space. The manpage can be misleading to someone who doesn't know dmcrypt well and wants to resize a LUKS container. At least append something like "to compute the maximum available size" or change to "the whole available space is used" for example. The maximum size in the case of LUKS is, I think, the size of the block device minus the offset; this could be additionaly stated in the manpage. Thanks