Choosing use entire partition actually results in using entire disc

[Erick Brunzell]

Binary package hint: ubiquity

I'm just following up on some info I reported in bug 657397 that I don't believe is an actual duplicate.

I began with this partitioning arrangement:

lance@lance-desktop:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
[sudo] password for lance:
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 1121MB 1120MB primary ntfs
 2 1121MB 74.7GB 73.5GB primary ntfs
 3 74.7GB 80.0GB 5366MB primary ntfs

I then selected "Install alongside other operating systems” and next I clicked on "Use entire partition" but upon completing the installation it had actually used the entire disc as seen here:

ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 76.7GB 76.7GB primary ext4
 2 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB extended
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

I'll be following up on this and other ubiquity bugs during Natty iso-testing.

You might find the info here somewhat helpful:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=10145206&postcount=15

One difference between the scenario I mentioned there and here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/657397/comments/3

is that in the prior scenario the GUI showed it was going to use /devsdb with 2 partitions hidden, whereas this time the GUI was blank although it did still show 2 smaller partitions hidden.

I'm going to perform another similar test now, only with an installed Ubuntu.

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10
Package: ubiquity 2.4.8
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-generic 2.6.35.4
Uname: Linux 2.6.35-22-generic i686
Architecture: i386
Date: Sun Nov 28 11:16:15 2010
LiveMediaBuild: Ubuntu 10.10 "Maverick Meerkat" - Release i386 (20101007)
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: ubiquity
---
Architecture: i386
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10
LiveMediaBuild: Ubuntu 10.10 "Maverick Meerkat" - Release i386 (20101007)
Package: ubiquity 2.4.8
PackageArchitecture: i386
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-generic 2.6.35.4
Tags: maverick
Uname: Linux 2.6.35-22-generic i686
UserGroups: adm admin cdrom dialout lpadmin plugdev sambashare

---
Architecture: i386
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10
LiveMediaBuild: Ubuntu 10.10 "Maverick Meerkat" - Release i386 (20101007)
Package: ubiquity 2.4.8
PackageArchitecture: i386
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-22.33-generic 2.6.35.4
Tags: maverick
Uname: Linux 2.6.35-22-generic i686
UserGroups: adm admin cdrom dialout lpadmin plugdev sambashare

---
Architecture: i386
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.04
LiveMediaBuild: Ubuntu 11.04 "Natty Narwhal" - Alpha i386 (20101202)
Package: ubiquity 2.5.3
PackageArchitecture: i386
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.37-7.19-generic 2.6.37-rc3
Tags: natty
Uname: Linux 2.6.37-7-generic i686
UserGroups: adm admin cdrom dialout lpadmin plugdev sambashare

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

I should also have mentioned that I find being offered the options to "Use entire partition" and "Use entire disc" after having selected "Install alongside other operating systems” very confusing, both for noobs and experienced users, but that discussion belongs either at bug 655950 or at the ubuntu-installer list.

But very briefly just consider selecting "Install alongside other operating systems”, then being presented with the options "Use entire partition" and "Use entire disc", and on the next screen once again being asked ""Split Largest Partition". Maybe updating documentation is the way to go, I'm not sure.

Regardless I felt it important to report what I find. I do wonder at this point if we should amend the Maverick release notes?

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

It appears that apport-collect worked here.

I began with:

ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 76.7GB 76.7GB primary ext4
 2 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB extended
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

I was not even planning on performing another actual test at this point (many interruptions) but I thought it would be cool to try something new so I THINK what I did was select ""Install alongside other operating systems”, then select "Use entire partition", followed by "split largest partition" at which point I changed the slider to create a new Ubuntu about 50GB.

This is what I ended up with:

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 76.7GB 76.7GB primary ext4
 2 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB extended
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

So it actually just created a fully new install? I'm sure you'll be able to sort out what happened from the logs.

I'm now going to try one more thing. I've been thinking about how to adjust my iso-testing procedure to make the best use of my time anyway.

I used to start by doing an "entire disc" install, followed by "side by side", and then a manual install. I think I'll now try "entire disc", "manual", and then follow up with "alongside".

Needless to say I truly don't believe the "use entire disc" or "use entire partition" options belong in the GUI after choosing to "install alongside", and this bug, if verified, is a killer!

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

Well that last bunch of info is from an install that seems to have worked properly.

I began with:

ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 10.6GB 10.6GB primary ext4
 3 10.6GB 19.1GB 8465MB primary ext4
 4 19.1GB 76.7GB 57.7GB primary ext4
 2 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB extended
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

Shared swap, sdb1 is a stand alone /, sdb3 and sdb4 are / and /home respectively.

Then, after going > Alongside > Use entire partition > Split largest I ended up with:

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 10.6GB 10.6GB primary ext4
 3 10.6GB 19.1GB 8465MB primary ext4
 4 19.1GB 36.7GB 17.6GB primary ext4
 2 36.7GB 80.0GB 43.3GB extended
 6 36.7GB 75.0GB 38.3GB logical ext4
 7 75.0GB 76.7GB 1685MB logical linux-swap(v1)
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

Anyway, I'm tired! And I still think we're offering confusing options after choosing "alongside" ;^)

Also pondering how to most time efficiently iso-test??????????

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

Well, just following up here :^)

After performing several more tests what I seem to have found is that this can only be reproduced if no extended and/or logical partitions exist. Of course that would be the case with Windows users.

Two ways I seem to be able to reproduce this bug are by creating 3 blank NTFS partitions as in the original report, and the second is creating a manual install of Ubuntu with a layout similar to this:

lance@lance-desktop:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
[sudo] password for lance:
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 8484MB 8483MB primary ext4 boot
 2 8484MB 77.7GB 69.3GB primary ext4
 3 77.7GB 80.0GB 2289MB primary linux-swap(v1)

I created a scenario I'd never actually use! Root/Home/SWAP all on primary partitions!

At this point it seems that if an extended partition is present this bug/overwrite doesn't happen.

So, I THINK that this can be reproduced either by creating 3 empty NTFS primary partitions or creating an Ubuntu install with 3 primary partitions and then choosing the "alongside" option followed by choosing the "use entire partition" option.

I still contend that the "Use entire partition" and "Use entire disc" options just DO NOT BELONG after choosing "install alongside"!

I'll try to continue following up on this. As it stands my suggestion is to drop the confusing options and restore the "use largest continuous space" option.

IMHO this was a major regression.

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

apport information

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

I ran apport-collect to gather some info using the Natty Alpha1 iso-testing i386 Live CD. Hopefully you can parse that info to verify what I'm saying here. I began with this partitioning arrangement:

Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 8484MB 8483MB primary ext4 boot
 2 8484MB 77.7GB 69.3GB primary ext4
 3 77.7GB 80.0GB 2289MB primary linux-swap(v1)

That was actually three primary partitions that I created for a test install of Natty, certainly not a typical install, but I'd been testing this with 3 NTFS partitions that contained no actual data and I wanted to use partitions that actually contained data and/or an OS.

Having selected "install alongside other OS's" I then selected "Use entire partition" but instead of just using all of sdb2 it used all of sdb as you can see here:

ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo parted /dev/sdb print
Model: ATA WDC WD800JB-00JJ (scsi)
Disk /dev/sdb: 80.0GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 1049kB 76.7GB 76.7GB primary ext4
 2 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB extended
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

I still think that the use entire partition and use entire disc options should not even be displayed after selecting "alongside" but since they're there they should at least do what they say they're going to.

I'm also adding a comment at 657397 but I'll refer to the apport-collect info here.

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

I did a bit more testing this AM since I'd finally gotten my mind around this a bit. I know some of my previous comments got a bit rambling so here's a recap:

This bug can be reproduced by creating either 2 or 3 primary partitions on a testing drive. No extended or logical partitions may be present on the drive.

I've tried this with empty NTFS partitions and a "manually installed" Ubuntu that uses only primary partitions.

Having chosen "Install alongside .........." the installer selects the largest partition as it should, but if you then select "Use entire partition" it actually uses the entire drive.

I must say though, I can't imagine any circumstance under which a person would want to select "Use entire partition" after selecting "Install alongside ..........". I suspect this is responsible for an uptick in reports of OS/data loss at the forums.

IMO the "Use entire partition" and "Use entire disc" options just don't belong there. In fact I believe they only present an opportunity for an inexperienced user to wipe out an existing OS and/or data.

The "Erase and use entire disc" option on the previous screen is more appropriately descriptive.

If I had my druthers I'd like to just see those options removed and have the "Use largest continuous free space" option restored to the prior screen.

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

I wished when I'd said, "The "Erase and use entire disc" option on the previous screen is more appropriately descriptive", I'd actually said:

The "Erase and use entire disc" option on the previous screen is not only more appropriately descriptive, but I believe the placement is also more appropriate.

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

Just bringing this up to date as I did here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/652852/comments/27

This is giving Ubuntu a serious black eye!

We've made installing Ubuntu in a dual-boot into very risky behavior!

[Phillip Susi (psusi)]

This causes data loss, therefore meets the guidelines for critical importance.

[Erick Brunzell (lbsolost)]

It turns out that this may be a duplicate of bug 659106 but in that case, from the info provided, it appears Paul began with an extended partition so that blows a hole in my theory about this only being reproducible with only primary partitions existing :^(

I'd still refer everyone to bug 655950 and also bug 652852. Also bug 657397 may be loosely related.

After following this dilemma off and on at the forums for several weeks I'm quite convinced that displaying the "Use entire partition" and "Use entire disc" options after having already rejected the option to "Erase and use entire disc", and having selected "Install alongside other OS" instead, serve no reasonable purpose and only provide an opportunity to destroy existing data and/or any existing OS's.

If the installer finds an acceptable partitioning arrangement (ie: three or less primary partitions) it displays the option to "install alongside" as it should, so under what circumstance would a person want to use and erase an existing partition? If they're performing a reinstall over existing partitions the "manual/advanced" option provides the proper tools to do so (including the ability to not format an existing /home).

And this is an area where we must all put our "noob shoes" on. Most Windows users don't know the difference between a disc and a partition so we're simply offering potentially destructive options. Sadly this has also effected some fairly long term Ubuntu users.

OTOH since both Vista and Win7 have their own partitioning tools the "Use largest continuous free space" option was truly brilliant and IMHO the safest possible dual-boot method for a first timer, aside from possibly Wubi.

Regardless I'm not going to mark anything as a duplicate ATM, I'll leave that decision up to the devs.

[candtalan (aeclist)]

quote:
'And this is an area where we must all put our "noob shoes" on. Most Windows users don't know the difference between a disc and a partition so we're simply offering potentially destructive options. Sadly this has also effected some fairly long term Ubuntu users'

Windows actually *calls* partitions 'Disks' C:, D: ........

quote:
'both Vista and Win7 have their own partitioning tools the "Use largest continuous free space" option was truly brilliant and IMHO the safest possible dual-boot method for a first timer'

I support this in the strongest way possible!!
It is even more important now because in a number of situations, Vista and Win7 have system files put in places which make it very inconvenient (or impossible) to shrink the partition (strange, that?). Unless the in situ resize tools are used then real damage is done by use of third party tools. The damage can I think be repaired using windows repair tools but hey, you do not need many newbie 'disasters' before a folklore reputation grows which reinforces the existing reluctance to change away from Windows.