the manual partitionning screen change partitions numbers

Bug #557913 reported by Sebastien Bacher on 2010-04-08
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
ubiquity (Ubuntu)

Bug Description

Binary package hint: ubiquity

Using the current beta2 iso and manual partitionning, deleting a partition leads to have the sda<n> for others partitions on the disk to be changed on the summary screen, very confusing when you know the one you need to keep and you see it listed as a swap there...

In this case I deleted sda8 which is a swap partition which leaded to the other partition sda<n> to change in the summary screen

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.04
Package: ubiquity 2.2.15
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.32-19.28-generic
Uname: Linux 2.6.32-19-generic i686
Architecture: i386
Date: Thu Apr 8 10:05:09 2010
LiveMediaBuild: Ubuntu 10.04 "Lucid Lynx" - Beta i386 (20100406.1)
SourcePackage: ubiquity

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :
Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

notice how the sda8 partition is labeled sda9 in the new summary

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

> notice how the sda8 partition is labeled sda9 in the new summary

sorry it's the other way around, sda9 becomes sda8 which was the the swap partition deleted

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

on an extra note the environ has C LANG and LANGUAGE but the installation is a french one...

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

(the issue is the same when running in english mode to rule out translations effect there)

description: updated
Colin Watson (cjwatson) wrote :

I can see how this is confusing, but I don't think there's very much we can do about it, and it's not a recent change or anything. The manual partitioning summary displays what the state of the partition table is going to be after you commit changes. Partition numbers aren't stored anywhere in the partition table - they're calculated on the fly by the kernel etc. - so if you delete a partition then any partitions numerically after it *do* have their numbers changed, and the partitioner is just reflecting that fact.

Do you have any thoughts on how we could resolve the confusion here? I don't think it would be appropriate to leave the later partitions numbered in a way that doesn't match what their numbers will be after changes are committed, and right now I can't think of any other change that wouldn't do more harm than good ...

Sebastien Bacher (seb128) wrote :

Ok, thank you for the reply. the confusion came mainly from associating the installation to keep to it's "sda<n>" entry and not knowing the ordering could change this way without knowing the effect it would have on the installation to keep.

I don't see a good way of dealing with that though out of display a "/!\ ordering of partitions has been changed" label somewhere in the dialog with maybe a button or url to click giving details on the consequence that would have on existing installations (ie that the partition will not be destroyed but it could create bugs for things really on the partition number to stay identic)

tags: added: iso-testing
Colin Watson (cjwatson) on 2010-04-08
Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
status: New → Triaged
tags: added: ubiquity-2.2.15
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers