ubuntu-installer/partman does not properly detect partitions on FBA device

[bugproxy]

I installed Ubuntu 16.04 on an FBA device. When the partman menu appeared, I created a new partition table on DASD 0.0.ede0 (FBA), and then I created two partitions: 0.7G ext4 for /boot and 10G ext4 for /.
Installation proceeded ok, and the system ipled from EDEV EDE0. All fine.

During a 2nd installation on the same device the following problem occured:
After activation of the previously installed EDEV disk, partman shows one single full size partition, which is not correct:
? DASD 0.0.ede0 (FBA ) - 10.7 GB IBM S390 DASD drive ?
? > #1 10.7 GB ?
while kernel has the correct info:
~ # cat /proc/partitions |grep dasd
94 0 10485760 dasda
94 1 683584 dasda1
94 2 9801984 dasda2
Continuing with the installation from here results in a system IPL that ends up in an initramfs, since the rootfs could not be mounted due to an incorrect partition table.

Attaching syslog.

Until this bug is fixed, I recommend to describe the workaround (when installing on EDEV DASD it is highly recommended to create an empty partition table on the entire device before partitioning) in the release notes.

Maybe you can have a look info LTC bug 137464 / LP1548411 which described a similar problem with vdisks under KVM.

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment From <email address hidden> 2016-05-04 10:17 EDT-------
I installed Ubuntu 16.04 on an FBA device. When the partman menu appeared, I created a new partition table on DASD 0.0.ede0 (FBA), and then I created two partitions: 0.7G ext4 for /boot and 10G ext4 for /.
Installation proceeded ok, and the system ipled from EDEV EDE0. All fine.

During a 2nd installation on the same device the following problem occured:
After activation of the previously installed EDEV disk, partman shows one single full size partition, which is not correct:
? DASD 0.0.ede0 (FBA ) - 10.7 GB IBM S390 DASD drive ?
? > #1 10.7 GB ?
while kernel has the correct info:
~ # cat /proc/partitions |grep dasd
94 0 10485760 dasda
94 1 683584 dasda1
94 2 9801984 dasda2
Continuing with the installation from here results in a system IPL that ends up in an initramfs, since the rootfs could not be mounted due to an incorrect partition table.

Attaching syslog.

Until this bug is fixed, I recommend to describe the workaround (when installing on EDEV DASD it is highly recommended to create an empty partition table on the entire device before partitioning) in the release notes.

Maybe you can have a look info LTC bug 137464 / LP1548411 which described a similar problem with vdisks under KVM.

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment (attachment only) From <email address hidden> 2016-05-04 10:18 EDT-------

[Ubuntu Foundations Team Bug Bot (crichton)]

Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and helping to make Ubuntu better. It seems that your bug report is not filed about a specific source package though, rather it is just filed against Ubuntu in general. It is important that bug reports be filed about source packages so that people interested in the package can find the bugs about it. You can find some hints about determining what package your bug might be about at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/FindRightPackage. You might also ask for help in the #ubuntu-bugs irc channel on Freenode.

To change the source package that this bug is filed about visit https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1578232/+editstatus and add the package name in the text box next to the word Package.

[This is an automated message. I apologize if it reached you inappropriately; please just reply to this message indicating so.]

[dann frazier (dannf)]

The comments above seem unrelated to the description. Can you please file a separate issue(s) for that?

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment (attachment only) From <email address hidden> 2016-05-04 10:18 EDT-------

[Luciano Chavez (lnx1138)]

Hello Dan,

Our bridge had a "hiccup" this morning and grabbed the description and summary from a previously mirrored bug so our apologies. I update the summary and the actual description is what was displayed in comment #1. The syslog file is also correct.

[Luciano Chavez (lnx1138)]

I was going to delete the initial description but since that got mirrored over to our bug, I suspect the bridge will just mirror it back. :-(

[Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox)]

You should really upgrade to rsa ssh keys =) given that OpenSSH 7.0 disables ssh-dss keys by default

May 4 14:02:19 sshd[7517]: userauth_pubkey: key type ssh-dss not in PubkeyAcceptedKeyTypes

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment From <email address hidden> 2016-12-13 09:41 EDT-------
Changed Target to 17.04 after discussion with Canonical

[Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox)]

Bridge has miss-mirrored this bug report. Can you please open a new (clean) bug report for this issue and mirror it accross? Is it still reproducible, and isn't this a linux kernel bug rather than installer?

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment From <email address hidden> 2016-12-15 06:53 EDT-------
IBM will retest and if problem still exit open another LP...

[bugproxy (bugproxy)]

------- Comment From <email address hidden> 2016-12-15 10:04 EDT-------
This bugzilla is closed within IBM-Bugzilla.
Problem description will be handled via new problem report!

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 149975 ***