Ubuntu

ubiquity confusion w/ auto-resize option results in OS and data loss

Reported by Erick Brunzell on 2010-10-06
96
This bug affects 20 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Release Notes for Ubuntu
Undecided
Unassigned
ubiquity (Ubuntu)
High
Evan Dandrea
Maverick
Undecided
Unassigned
Natty
High
Evan Dandrea

Bug Description

Binary package hint: ubiquity

I'm aware that this is more of a "design decision" than a bug but in real life this can, and almost undoubtedly will, result in confusion. And any function that results in unwanted or unexpected consequences is a bug to the end user.

After selecting the "auto-resize" option during installation I got the image displayed here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9932382&postcount=179

Why ask "Use Entire Disc" or "Use Entire Partition"? Shouldn't I see only the ability to "drag" partition size or use the advanced partitioner?

Remember that most Windows users, who are the most likely first time dual-booters, are still thinking "Drive A, Drive C, etc" :^)

I tend to think that once you've chosen "side-by-side" the "Use Entire Disc" or "Use Entire Partition" options should be "greyed out" just as they are if you've chosen to use the entire disc.

Otherwise this is looking very, very good!

tags: added: iso-testing
Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :
Download full text (3.8 KiB)

Upon more testing with the Ubuntu Desktop i386 [20101007] iso I see there is an actual bug in the ointment.

I chose to auto-resize drive sdb which I'd been using for iso-testing and it had two Ubuntu's on it, each with a new swap, well actually the second would have been using both swap partitions. You know how "auto" installs work, you'll end up with a new swap for each new install, etc.

The graphic that consists of a "slider" to change the partition size showed sdb1 on the left and sdb2 on the right so I thought, "hmmm it's going to create a primary partition for the new install"? That would be odd, but it didn't, it did what I'm used to seeing:

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 19.3GB 19.3GB primary ext4
 2 19.3GB 80.0GB 60.7GB extended
 8 19.3GB 37.8GB 18.5GB logical ext4
 9 37.8GB 38.7GB 849MB logical linux-swap(v1)
 6 38.7GB 75.1GB 36.4GB logical ext4
 7 75.1GB 76.7GB 1604MB logical linux-swap(v1)
 5 76.7GB 80.0GB 3305MB logical linux-swap(v1)

That is it created sda8 as "/" and sda9 as swap, both as logical partitions, so it's simply displaying bogus info. How confusing that might be to a total noob I'm unsure.

Just to see how reproducible this was I selected my drive sda which I'd never use auto-resize on anyway:

lance@lance-desktop:~$ sudo parted /dev/sda print
Model: ATA WDC WD5000AAKS-0 (scsi)
Disk /dev/sda: 500GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: msdos

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 32.3kB 21.5GB 21.5GB primary ext3 boot
 2 21.5GB 42.9GB 21.5GB primary ext3
 3 42.9GB 151GB 108GB primary ext3
 4 151GB 500GB 349GB extended
14 151GB 172GB 21.1GB logical ext4
15 172GB 193GB 21.1GB logical ext4
16 193GB 215GB 21.4GB logical ext4
17 215GB 236GB 21.4GB logical ext4
13 236GB 258GB 22.0GB logical ext4
12 258GB 280GB 21.6GB logical ext3
11 280GB 301GB 21.7GB logical ext3
10 301GB 323GB 21.8GB logical ext3
 5 323GB 378GB 55.1GB logical ext3
 6 378GB 432GB 53.6GB logical ext3
 7 432GB 487GB 54.9GB logical ext3
 8 487GB 498GB 10.7GB logical ext3
 9 498GB 500GB 2517MB logical linux-swap(v1)

Ridiculous I know but I do a lot of testing and VM's do a poor job of testing actual hardware. Anyway, since sda3 is the largest partition, the screen after selecting "auto-resize" showed it was splitting sda3 into sda3 and sda4. Of course that's not possible since sda4 is an extended partition and since I have 3 primaries and an extended already there would be no way to split sda3 and simply "renumber" drives.

Of course I quit the install because I don't really want to start over with that drive even though my data is backed up, so I have no idea what would have really happened....

Read more...

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

Well I ran three more tests, albeit quitting the installs to expedite testing, and the first looked promising, the second less so, but the third scares me real bad.

Test #1 began with 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 32.3kB 1119MB 1119MB primary ntfs
 2 1119MB 53.7GB 52.6GB primary ntfs
 3 53.7GB 59.0GB 5322MB primary ntfs
 4 59.0GB 80.0GB 21.0GB extended
 5 59.0GB 77.8GB 18.8GB logical ext4
 6 77.8GB 80.0GB 2270MB logical linux-swap(v1)

The result was good, it offered to resize sdb5 and leave all three NTFS partitions alone.

Test #2 began just by deleting sdb4, 5 & 6:

Number Start End Size Type File system Flags
 1 32.3kB 1119MB 1119MB primary ntfs
 2 1119MB 53.7GB 52.6GB primary ntfs
 3 53.7GB 59.0GB 5322MB primary ntfs

But I left the free space unallocated and was offered to resize sdb2. Not great but at least it shouldn't result in data loss regardless of the outcome. It would however be nice to have the option of using the free space :^)

For test #3 I created four NTFS partitions. That's not uncommon with new "branded" Win 7 computers, you'll quite often see one tiny partition with part of the Win boot files, the main OS partition, another with "recovery", and a fourth with some silly "system utilities".

Anyway running a test with 4 NTFS partitions resulted in "The entire disc will be used" and of course you also see the offer to go advanced but I can guarantee you that people don't read! They think, "I told it to install side-by-side so that's what it should do"! And also realize that most Windows users are used to Drive A, Drive C, etc. so when they see I'm going to "use the whole disc" they're NOT thinking what you and I think.

I'm reminded of what Ivanka Majic said here:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/628087/comments/31

"The installation experience should be attractive and effortless to reassure new users that Ubuntu is the right choice. The process should feel safe and should only highlight risk when necessary (e.g. when data will be destroyed)."

We are NOT highlighting that risk!

I can only imagine the forums being flooded with complaints of lost OS's and data. Not a good thing!

Sadly I have no idea how to deal with this.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

I subscribed the Release Team because I think this is quite serious. At the least this is something we need to mention in the release notes.

Evan Dandrea (ev) wrote :

Please file one bug per issue.

Regarding your original concern of the presence of "use entire disk" and "use entire partition" buttons, I fail to see how they do any harm. Their presence is part convenience, and part desire to consolidate the automatic partitioning options to a single page. The fact that the first partitioning page offers you separate "use entire disk" and "resize partition" options is arguably a bug, but I am otherwise satisfied with the UI.

Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu Maverick):
status: New → Won't Fix
Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
status: New → Won't Fix
Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

I'm cool with this decision. While trying to reproduce the "4 NTFS" thing I did encounter two super teeny, tiny bugs:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/657078

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/casper/+bug/657086

Neither is of any real importance, and the "four NTFS" thing was largely because none of the four partitions had an OS installed, so the only real difference is the lack of the message "There is no OS ........". I repeated this with an old XP system and I think we're OK.

I'll have to look at the issue of the installer using improper device designations much later. I'm just toast :^)

Ultimately we'll have to wait and see how new users respond to this, I'll certainly try to watch the forums.

I suspect the most frequent complaint from veteran users will be the lack of a "use largest free space" option. I've already seen that twice at Maverick devel in the forums.

All things considered I think you did an exemplary job of pulling this together in a few short weeks.

Phillip Susi (psusi) wrote :

The two buttons to use the entire disk or partition have no place on that screen. They effectively reverse the previous choice to perform a side-by-side install. It also is quite understandable that someone would think the partition the button was talking about is the one shown above for Ubuntu, NOT the partition that currently exists on the disk containing windows. This is a very poor UI choice and should be fixed.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Phillip Susi,

I agree and I'm reluctantly working on addressing this through Ayatana, even though ubiquity is not on the "list":

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1595807

Particularly this post should sum up the confusion:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9986685&postcount=46

With the "Use entire partition and/or disc" options available it can lead someone to wonder if they need to say yes or no to creating a new partition and/or disc before clicking on "install now".

Many first time Windows dual booters will still be thinking Drive A, Drive C, etc.

This is just unacceptable.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Phillip Susi,

Upon noticing that you hadn't subscribed to this bug I did so for you.

Apologies in advance if I did so wrongly.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

I think the failings here are obvious. It really shouldn't need explaining imo. Is it the intention to frighten prospective users away entirely (after wiping their Windows installation, that is)? If so, good job.
If confirmation is required, have a look in the forums or take note of the (no doubt) increase in the number of times testdisk has been downloaded.
As a somewhat experienced installer, I always select the manual partitioning option as experience has taught me not to trust any installer. Less experienced users will have no trouble whatsoever hosing any existing installation with this installer. Maybe it should be renamed Ubiquity os-hoser.

candtalan (aeclist) wrote :

A somewhat indirectly, but related issue is I think described in
Maverick installer lost Windows partitions: Bug #659106

Jehiva (jehiva) wrote :

This screwed me over, I really wish I would have looked it up prior to using the option.

I had three partitions all set and ready to go. One was my existing NTFS partition with Windows 7 on it.

Another was my Ubuntu 10.10 32 bit partition.

Lastly I had a third partition formatted as ext4, I had that partition selected and chose to Use Entire Partition.

The damn installer took the entire hard drive for the new Ubuntu 10.10 64 bit install.

Claiming that what I wanted to do was split partitions or something is ridiculous, I had 3 distinct partitions - each formatted completely different (NTFS, ext3, ext4) and the thing used the entire disk.

If I had wanted to use the entire disk, I would have chose that option.

VERY misleading and aggravating. The 10.04 installer worked perfect to allow me to dual boot Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04 while the 10.10 installer just screwed me over and erased all my data.

I agree entirely. The 10.04 (and previous) installer had to be changed
because it wouldn't recognise some modern partition types, but apart
from that, there was nothing wrong with its layout. This new one is
ridiculous in my view and should be put in the bin.
It is going to make sure that people stay away from Linux instead of
embrace it!
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 15:39 +0000, Jehiva wrote:
> This screwed me over, I really wish I would have looked it up prior to
> using the option.
>
> I had three partitions all set and ready to go. One was my existing NTFS
> partition with Windows 7 on it.
>
> Another was my Ubuntu 10.10 32 bit partition.
>
> Lastly I had a third partition formatted as ext4, I had that partition
> selected and chose to Use Entire Partition.
>
> The damn installer took the entire hard drive for the new Ubuntu 10.10
> 64 bit install.
>
> Claiming that what I wanted to do was split partitions or something is
> ridiculous, I had 3 distinct partitions - each formatted completely
> different (NTFS, ext3, ext4) and the thing used the entire disk.
>
> If I had wanted to use the entire disk, I would have chose that option.
>
> VERY misleading and aggravating. The 10.04 installer worked perfect to
> allow me to dual boot Windows 7 and Ubuntu 10.04 while the 10.10
> installer just screwed me over and erased all my data.
>

Just bringing things up to date as I did in bug 652852.

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

All of these four bugs are very much related!

Martin Spacek (mspacek) wrote :

Uh, Evan Dandrea, why exactly have you marked this as won't fix? I've been running and installing Ubuntu for years and yet I'm still confused by ubiquity's new behaviour. See related bug #1.

Martin Spacek (mspacek) wrote :

Sorry, somehow I missed Evan's comment #4, but that still doesn't explain away the confusion I personally encountered when presented with the "Use Entire Disc" or "Use Entire Partition" options after choosing side-by-side installation.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

Thought I'd begin listing some instances of OS and data loss related to this:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1647243

Two here, the second beginning with post #17:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1602137

Yet another:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1647050

I could go on and on, but I'd think by now I'd be trusted when I say, "there's been quite an up-tick in the number of side-by-side installs resulting in data/OS loss with the new ubiquity". I'm not making this up, and I'm not just being critical, I love Ubuntu and I want everyone's experience to be as good as mine has been :^)

Of course there's no telling how many potential Ubuntu converts we lose when things like this happen, and new users that have this experience are only concerned about recovering their system, not filing bug reports :^(

Since these new users don't file bugs I can only try to play devils advocate, which is why I performed additional testing and discovered bug 682429. Believe me, I'd rather be doing something else. It's much easier, and more my nature, to just be agreeable and never make waves.

ATM I wonder if the Maverick release notes could be edited to somehow reflect this? I know people may not read them but the team has done an excellent job of presenting that option at the very beginning of using ubiquity.

I sincerely hope I'm not just coming across as a pest, I just don't like telling someone that they've wiped out their data and/or Windows.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

Certainly prospective new users who have spent a couple of days trying to get their Windows system back to where it was before they tried installing 10.10 won't be filing bug reports. They probably feel more like filing a law suit :-)
"Won't fix" - now there's a statement!
"Won't listen" may be more appropriate!

It's not rocket science guys. Once somebody has chosen "install alongside", the options "Use Entire Disc" or "Use Entire Partition" are redundant and can only serve to confuse people who may be new to installing anything.
But that's not the worst of it!
Choosing to "install alongside" and then being able to trash the system you intend to "install alongside" is just potty!

I really don't understand the retiscence in regard to seeing the difficulties here, nevermind doing something about it.
People have posted here and in the forums, as Erick Brunzell has stated, about losing their existing system because they made a "mistake" when using the 10.10 installer. I don't agree that they made a mistake. I think the installer is wrong.
I don't think the ability to make that "mistake" should exist at all.

This is not a "problem" - this is a showstopper for prospective Linux users.
A disaster waiting to happen.

ezsit (ezsit) wrote :

I've been using Ubuntu since version 5.04 and this installer in 10.10 is the worst I've ever seen from a usability perspective. I'm an advanced user and only use the manual partitioning tools so I had to test this for myself. The options and the layout are confusing and the propensity for error is real.

The options to Use Entire Disk and Use Entire Partition should NOT appear where they are not needed and their appearance does more potential harm than good. If a user selects to install alongside an existing operating system, they have made their choice and should not be given options that would undo their choice (unless that option is labeled UNDO). Warning screens in bright RED should be thrown up if a user selects something inappropriate or possibly dangerous, better yet, do not give users the option of screwing themselves. That should be what a good installer does, not let the user screw themselves.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

Post #6 here seems to sum up people's feelings about this
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1652092

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Mike D, based on what they said:

"During installation I asked that Ubuntu should be installed in an existing 250 GB partition on my second disk, selecting about 240 GB for the system and about 10 GB for swapping. In the event my selection was ignored and I ended-up with three partitions, one of about 220 GB (empty) with the sytem installed in /dev/sdb6 (about 20 GB) and the swap in /dev/sdb7 (about 10 GB). So, all-in-all, a pretty miserable experience."

That leads me to think this is more relative to bug 652852.

Regardless, the new ubiquity combined with Wubi/grub 2 bugs have made Ubuntu the least noob friendly I've ever seen it :^(

I've thought about mentioning it at bug 1, but I've already tried Ayatana and ubuntu-installer. At this point I can only assume that Ubuntu no longer wants new users that want to dual-boot.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

Happy Christmas :-)

candtalan (aeclist) wrote :

@Mike D
"Once somebody has chosen "install alongside", the options "Use Entire Disc" or "Use Entire Partition" are redundant and can only serve to confuse people who may be new to installing anything."
I partly agree, however I was happy that because I wanted to retain existing OS's on my disk, that my choice of 'Install Alongside' was a *correct* choice.

I actually wanted to install into a certain partition (alongside) on the disc, and as it happens this *was* the partition the installer offered to me to resize currently. Therefore, my subsequent decision to click the button 'Install into Entire Partition' *was* logical, correct and appropriate. No confusion. The only problem was it wrecked my whole drive, one Windows OS and two Ubuntu OS's.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

and another one
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1658234

Relevant passage
"And your warnings about the 'install alongside' option came too late - I had of course already tried the installation when I posted my problem. So I now discover that the Ubuntu installation has wiped Windows from my brand new laptop.

Having an 'install alongside' option which does nothing of the sort but wipes the 'alongside' OS partition instead is one hell of a bug!!"

summary: - Maverick ubiquity confusion w/ auto-resize option
+ Maverick ubiquity confusion w/ auto-resize option results in OS and data
+ loss

Another one bites the dust:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1667559

Quote:

"I lost my entire windows partition due to a misleading option in ubuntu 10.10 installation.

There is an option to install ubuntu side by side. Once that option is selected it should never use entire disk for installation. But that is not the fact.

After selecting that option, it will display the largest partition available on disk. We can drag the pointer to select the appropriate size for ubuntu from that partition. But below, there is another option 'Select entire partition'.

So 'Select entire partition' should select only that single partition showed above. It should not use entire disk. But it used entire disk (In my case). Isn't it wrong?"

Ubuntu's reputation is being harmed here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Joshua Montee (joshua-montee) wrote :

Ubuntu's reputation is certainly being harmed by this. There should be a 10.10.1 release, strictly because this bug is something that cannot be remedied by patching/updating after install. The installer is the problem, it is known to be dangerous, and continuing to distribute it this way is irresponsible and contemptuous. This should be urgently dealt with. Where is data security?

How does it look when you tell someone newly interested in Ubuntu how great it is, and then you provide them a CD along with a warning not to choose certain options during install? (Especially a "safe" side-by-side install?) ...And, if they get it wrong, they'll lose all the data on their hard drive.

This will without-a-doubt make people lose all faith in Ubuntu, and they won't even try it... and they won't try the next release either, and so on. Is this the first impression that wants to be conveyed?

Robbie Williamson (robbiew) wrote :

Joshua, ftr...the installer (if connected to the internet) has the ability to upgrade itself before running.

Robbie Williamson (robbiew) wrote :

Not making any promises yet, but there definitely appears to be an issue with how we communicate partitioning to users in the installer by the number of comments/dups/forum posts. Looking into how best to resolve this in Natty (11.04), and if a fix is possible in for 10.10.

Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
status: Won't Fix → Triaged
importance: Undecided → High
candtalan (aeclist) wrote :

@Robbie Williamson
'definitely appears to be an issue with how we communicate partitioning to users'

I add that there is a pretty deadly issue also with the way we *deliver* partitioning. Communication, sure, confusion. But that is not what is trashing whole drives, it is the incorrect function which is loosing data.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Robbie Williamson,

I believe, with a fair amount of certainty, that the option to "update this installer" was also removed from ubiquity in 10.10. That was a nice feature in 10.04, I don't recall if it was present in 9.10 or not.

The 10.10 installer does include the option to download updates during installation but that's quite a different thing.

I'd also recommend looking at the duplicates and comparing assignments, importance, etc. Unless Colin Watson has resigned he is the one to speak to. I tried at the ubuntu-installer team as Lance (my qa-testing moniker), and I even tried at Ayatana as Erick Brunzell to no avail!

So far all of my efforts may just as well have been sent to Santa at the North Pole :^/

This bug, combined with ongoing Wubi problems following initial updates as described here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1639198

And the recent failings at the Ubuntu forums to even allow posting will IMHO very soon result in rumors of Ubuntu's demise :^(

Evan Dandrea (ev) on 2011-01-20
Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
assignee: nobody → Evan Dandrea (ev)
milestone: none → ubuntu-11.04-beta
Robbie Williamson (robbiew) wrote :

So no fix is possible for 10.10 (sorry), but we will simply things in 11.04...so once "side by side" is selected, you can't overwrite.

Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty):
status: Triaged → Confirmed
Changed in ubuntu-release-notes:
status: New → Invalid
Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Robbie Williamson,

Would it still be possible to amend the 10.10 Release notes? I realize it's a bit of a stretch to think everyone will read them but the devs certainly made the recommendation to read the Release notes very prominent on the same page of the installer where language is selected.

Currently their is an "Installer" link to the right hand side of the notes but it only says, "The Ubiquity Installer has been redesigned to be easier to use as well as to install drivers and download updates during installation."

I don't know what exception would be required to edit that, but if we could add a prominent warning to the effect that [after selecting the "Install alongside other operating systems" option clicking on either the "Use entire partition" of "Use entire disc" buttons may. or quite likely will, result in a loss of data].

Could we ask a member of the Release Team? I'd feel a bit better if I could at least point to the release notes when telling someone they need to use TestDisk/PhotoRec to recover their data.

@ Evan Dandrea,

I'm looking forward to working with you. I'm sure this won't be easy and will undoubtedly require some consultation with the designers. You may first want to see if you agree with my decision on marking bug 659106 and bug 682429 as duplicates.

I'll certainly try to help with testing in any way possible. I am curious though if the use of Xubuntu for 11.04 testing would matter since Unity is a bit flaky on my hardware?

Robbie Williamson (robbiew) wrote :

@ Erick,

I added the following statement to the "Boot, installation, upgrade and post-install" section of "Known Issues" on the10.10 release notes, where these notices are typically found :
 * In dual boot installs, side-by-side partitioning can be overridden by the user, resulting in data loss. After selecting the "Install alongside other operating systems" option, clicking on either the "Use entire partition" of "Use entire disc" buttons will override the side-by-side partitioning and result in a loss of data. (Bug:655950)

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MaverickMeerkat/ReleaseNotes#Boot, installation, upgrade and post-install

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

@ Robbie Williamson,

Definitely a step in the right direction. Thank you.

Quackers (quackers) wrote :

Some welcome changes indeed, thanks to all involved.

It's hard to tell someone that their system is wrecked when they think they chose the "safe" option.

landroni (landroni) wrote :

This is a nasty looking bug indeed! And quite irresponsible from Canonical to continue shipping this bug. A 10.10.1 would have been a wiser decision.

Luckily I was already alert that Ubuntu could ship data-loss installer bugs (faulty grub or mbr, etc.) so I take special care to first check out the forums. Then I'll back up mbr and stray away from any 'auto' partitioning options

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

I understand this being marked as "milestone beta" and I'm sure that's a challenge. I do appreciate the complexity of dealing with this issue.

With Alpha 2 iso-testing coming up I see no need to re-report this bug but given the fact that I've had no feedback from either Evan or Colin I'm curious what the status is regarding bug 652852 ?

Have any redesign decisions been made?

Noobs want an easy and safe installation process. It appears we've done quite well not offering any insane options if four primary partitions already exist, so I think that should stop most noobs from proceeding w/o advice.

OTOH, if three or less primary partitions exist, it is so easy to resize an existing Win partition and then choose "Use the largest continuous free space" it's almost a "no-brainer". Is there any chance of that being included in this bug-fix?

Or should I continue filing reports regarding the lack of that option?

I often feel that I'm thrashing about with no hope of surviving and I really hate having to type replies like I did here:

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1679051

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

I'm aware this is milestone-Beta and I only reported it during Natty Alpha 2 iso-testing so the Release Notes will hopefully still reflect the potential for data loss.

summary: - Maverick ubiquity confusion w/ auto-resize option results in OS and data
- loss
+ ubiquity confusion w/ auto-resize option results in OS and data loss
Brian Murray (brian-murray) wrote :

I've updated the following (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NattyNarwhal/TechnicalOverview) with the same text Robbie used.

Erick Brunzell (lbsolost) wrote :

That looks great. Thank you very much.

Evan Dandrea (ev) wrote :

> With Alpha 2 iso-testing coming up I see no need to re-report this bug but
> given the fact that I've had no feedback from either Evan or Colin I'm
> curious what the status is regarding bug 652852 ?

It's assigned to me and milestoned for 11.04 beta.

Evan Dandrea (ev) wrote :

The installer no longer has the "use entire disk" and "use entire partition" buttons.

Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu Natty):
status: Confirmed → Fix Released
rva1945 (rva1945) wrote :

I had a 320GB already partitioned like this:

105 windows 7
215 just formatted (NTFS)

I wanted U 10.10 installed in the 215GB partition, and the boot loader menu at startup, like commonly used.

I used the drag partitions size menu, where the 215 partition appeared 50%/50% by default, two partitions of 107.5GB, one of them said Files 3.2GB under the icon, I understand that's the swap space. Well, I dragged until I had 30GB and 185GB or something like that, then clicked on install now.

The results? The whole disk was formatted, 307 GB ext4 and 13GB the swap file (why so large, I have 4GB of RAM?), and of course, the W7 was wiped out. That was not the expected result and I correctly followed the steps.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Duplicates of this bug

Other bug subscribers