Comment 4 for bug 979971

We obviously use English differently. Your response is unclear to me. What would "no problem without truecrypt be"? What is unclear about the statement:
"That means that I can't let Ubuntu write the grub2 menu to the MBR of /dev/sda as it would destroy the Truecrypt bootloader there."

So, to try to unmeander you. Yes, of course one can install Ubuntu to the MBR, I don't think Ubuntu would be a much used OS if that weren't the case.

Yes indeed, because Truecrypt insists on monopolising the MBR (yes, I know, not your doing etc.) that means that if you want Truecrypt encrypted windoze and ubuntu to coexist, ubuntu has to install the grub bootloader to another partition and yes, my account is clear (see my very clear point #2) that grub/ubuntu/debian-installer seems to have real difficulties with that. I think that's been confirmed as a grub bug elsewhere [Bug 997407] as the previous reply notes.

The rest of this bug report is about what happens when I attempt to get beyond that. I found that I can can override that failure (or apparent failure) to install grub to the partition by using the ubuntu rescue disc and appear to be able, with some external assistance and despite an error message saying you can't, to install a grub boot to a partition (my #3 to #9 above). However, one utterly clear bug to my mind is that this reveals that the "quiet splash vt.handoff=7" default in grub prevents you seeing the LUKS prompt for the passphrase so locks you up if you have LUKS encrypted your partitions. I don't know why that's not the case when you install grub to the MBR, someone who understands grub and the debian-installer can probably see why that is the case.

... But, as you rightly say, even when I remove that and get through to the LUKS prompt for the passphrase I clearly get LUKS decryption but I don't get to gnome and I'm baffled by that and don't understand enough about gnome normally gets launched to go further. I also, as you say, unflatteringly, seem to have had to meander so far up a set of workarounds that I decide simply to put it in as a bug, which I'm sure it is, probably actually a set of bugs.

So hear I am stuck with a lovely machine, with an OS I love and can encrypt (Linux & LUKS: my first love was Debian but after 15 or so years together I'm moving to Ubuntu because I thought it would have better support for newer hardware and exactly this sort of problem) AND I can in principle have encryption of my unloved OS (windoze) that I need to retain for some things ... but I can't have the two cohabiting on the hard disc of my lovely new machine and working for me!

Is that any clearer?