There appears to be multiple issues at play here: 1. YaST creates a different partition set-up with the same selected options when there are already partitions on the disk. This causes the different outcomes of install. 2. YaST attempts to create a too small btrfs partition in some circumstances. This causes the install failure. 3. GRUB is unable to boot with cryptodisk (maybe to do with UEFI Secure Boot?). This causes "error: Couldn't load sha256 hash." and "error: no such cryptodisk foud." I tested this in a KVM virtual machine using a 20GB virtual disk, using OVMF with Secure Boot. The partition setup I used each time in "Edit proposal settings" was to use encryption, do not create a separate /home and use btrfs for root. On the first install (with a blank disk), the partitioner automatically created an EFI System Partition, a 400MB /boot, and a LVM+LUKS container with / and swap. This installed and was booted successfully. On the second install, the partitioner automatically created an EFI System Partition, NO /boot partition, and the LVM+LUKS container. This installed successfully but does NOT boot, resulting in the GRUB sha256 hash error. On the third install, the same partitions are created as the first install. However, I manually overrided to partitioner to create the second partition setup, and also disabled Secure Boot in the firmware and in bootloader settings. This also failed to boot after install. Additionally, I noticed that after the third install the stub grub.cfg in the ESP had different UUIDs for the disk... Also I was able to boot my executing grubx64.efi from the EFI shell. So I think there are issues installing when overwriting an existing system. To sum up, the following scenarios can occur: A normal >= 400MB /boot partition is created and everything works. (VM, first install) A small (illegal) ~156MB /boot partition is created and the install fails. (My laptop) No /boot partition is created. The system cannot boot. (VM second and third installs)