'Erase Ubuntu [version] and reinstall' with 12.04 beta2 does not respect existing partitioning scheme

Bug #981583 reported by iGadget on 2012-04-14
14
This bug affects 2 people
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
ubiquity (Ubuntu)
Medium
Unassigned

Bug Description

When installing 12.04 beta2 from the Live CD and choosing 'Erase Ubuntu [version] and reinstall', the installer simply wipes the root partition, creates a new swap partition and installs everything on the root partition, instead of respecting the existing partitioning scheme.

My existing 11.10 installation had the following partitioning scheme:
- /boot /dev/sda5
- root on /dev/sda8
- /home on /dev/sda6
- swap on /dev/sda7
While walking through the 12.04 beta2 installation steps, the installer properly detected the 11.10 install and provided several options to proceed.
In the past I always selected 'Something else' because I always distrusted the other 'automagic' options.
For this release I figured I should try out if my distrust was still valid, and chose 'Erase Ubuntu 11.10 and reinstall'.

After the installation, I noticed that instead of re-using the existing partitioning scheme, the installer did the following:
- split up /dev/sda8 into a root and swap partition
- root on /dev/sda9 (new)
- swap on /dev/sda8 (new)
- /dev/sda5 (existing /boot) not mounted
- /dev/sda6 (existing /home) not mounted
- /dev/sda7 (existing swap) untouched

IMHO, it should have respected the original partitioning scheme and re-use this, or at the very least prompt me on what it would (or even better - ask me what it should) do with the existing partitions. As a user, I expect this behavior since the description of the 'Erase Ubuntu 11.10 and reinstall' option cleary states that it 'will delete all documents, photos, music and any other files.'

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 12.04
Package: ubiquity (not installed)
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 3.2.0-23.36-generic 3.2.14
Uname: Linux 3.2.0-23-generic x86_64
ApportVersion: 2.0.1-0ubuntu2
Architecture: amd64
Date: Sat Apr 14 14:22:59 2012
InstallCmdLine: file=/cdrom/preseed/ubuntu.seed boot=casper initrd=/casper/initrd.lz b43.blacklist=true --
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 12.04 LTS "Precise Pangolin" - Beta amd64 (20120328)
ProcEnviron:
 TERM=xterm
 PATH=(custom, no user)
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: ubiquity
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)

iGadget (igadget) wrote :
Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
importance: Undecided → Medium
Launchpad Janitor (janitor) wrote :

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

Changed in ubiquity (Ubuntu):
status: New → Confirmed
Tomasz Kuczak (tomasz-ks9) wrote :

This bug also exists in Ubuntu 13.10 and it removed all partitions on my laptop including recovery (which contained Windows 8 recovery files) and created ~500MB efi partition, ext4 taking almost whole disk and ~8GB swap at the end. I'm now unable to install Windows 8 again as I lost recovery partitions.

Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox) wrote :

@ Dan Sufho (tomasz-ks9)

Please open a different bug about wiping windows8 recovery partition.

Tomasz Kuczak (tomasz-ks9) wrote :

@ Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox)

I see I didn't read the bug description carefully and I now see that my situation doesn't fit into this bug. Although, I noticed there are already 2 bug reports describing my situation and I will just mark in one that it also affects me. I do not see a need to make another bug for windows8 recovery partitions as they are just ntfs partitions and are treated by ubuntu as normal partitions.

On 6 January 2014 10:46, Dan Sufho <email address hidden> wrote:
> @ Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox)
>
> I see I didn't read the bug description carefully and I now see that my
> situation doesn't fit into this bug. Although, I noticed there are
> already 2 bug reports describing my situation and I will just mark in
> one that it also affects me. I do not see a need to make another bug for
> windows8 recovery partitions as they are just ntfs partitions and are
> treated by ubuntu as normal partitions.
>

Which bugs? Can you please give those numbers? And do please open a
new bug report, and let the bug triangers to decide what should be
duplicates =)

--
Regards,

Dimitri.

Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox) wrote :

On 6 January 2014 11:04, Dimitri John Ledkov <email address hidden> wrote:
> On 6 January 2014 10:46, Dan Sufho <email address hidden> wrote:
>> @ Dimitri John Ledkov (xnox)
>>
>> I see I didn't read the bug description carefully and I now see that my
>> situation doesn't fit into this bug. Although, I noticed there are
>> already 2 bug reports describing my situation and I will just mark in
>> one that it also affects me. I do not see a need to make another bug for
>> windows8 recovery partitions as they are just ntfs partitions and are
>> treated by ubuntu as normal partitions.
>>
>
> Which bugs? Can you please give those numbers? And do please open a
> new bug report, and let the bug triangers to decide what should be
> duplicates =)

We shouldn't treat OS recovery partitions the same way as other ntfs
partitions, and indeed recovery partitions have different labels and
partiotion type IDs to declare them as such. (especially when users
don't have any other installation media).

--
Regards,

Dimitri.

Tomasz Kuczak (tomasz-ks9) wrote :

#1098785; #1265192 < - This one I mrked that it affects me and also commented it.

Jane Atkinson (irihapeti) wrote :

Occurred when testing Install (erase and reinstall) in a Vbox VM.

Initial partitioning scheme was root on /dev/sda1 and /home on /dev/sda5. Reinstall puts the whole system on /dev/sda1 and leaves /dev/sda5 untouched.

The test may appear to have worked, but anyone who thinks that their previous install (and data) has been totally wiped is mistaken.

Ubuntu QA Website (ubuntuqa) wrote :

This bug has been reported on the Ubuntu ISO testing tracker.

A list of all reports related to this bug can be found here:
http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/reports/bugs/981583

tags: added: iso-testing
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers