Ubuntu

Edgy Install from Desktop CD - Wrong HD Type

Bug #58601 reported by Mark W. Tomlinson
4
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu
Won't Fix
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

From the Knot 2 Desktop CD (i386) - booted into the desktop, started Install. Came to Partitioning (step 5 of 6, I believe) and it reported my 2 IDE drives (hda and hdb) as SCSI (sda and sdb). Continued to the actual patitioner (gparted, I think) and it still ID'd the drives as sda and sdb. I already have Dapper installed on the first drive, whit it correctly reports as hda.

(I'm downloading the Alternate image now, will give that a try.)

Revision history for this message
Jacob Peddicord (jpeddicord) wrote :

I can confirm this. My IDE drive is identified as 'hda' in Dapper, but in Edgy, it thinks it is SCSI and names the drive 'sda'. I used the alternate install CD, and I *think* the partitioner there said SCSI also. Once installed, the drives were still detected as SCSI (sda) improperly.

Revision history for this message
Jacob Peddicord (jpeddicord) wrote :

Would this have something to do with this bug? If so, then it seems to be more of a feature than a bug.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LibAtaForAtaDisks

Revision history for this message
Mark W. Tomlinson (mark-tomlinson) wrote :

Jacob, that may very well be what's happening. Unfortunately, I ran into a problem with the CD integrity check on the Alternate image (bug #58674) and I'm kinda hanging fire right at the moment...

Revision history for this message
Mark W. Tomlinson (mark-tomlinson) wrote :

Oops - I really should research before posting - I just checked the actual spec (https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+spec/libata-for-all-ata-disks) and discovered that the implementation has been deferred:

"Implementation Status: Deferred. There is no chance that this feature will actually be delivered in the targeted release. The specification has effectively been deferred to a later date of implementation."

So it doesn't look like it's the libata-pata drivers...

Revision history for this message
Micah Cowan (micahcowan) wrote :

Has this issue been addressed in Feisty? Thanks.

Revision history for this message
Micah Cowan (micahcowan) wrote :

And, is SCSI emultion of the HDs actually posing a problem in some way?

Revision history for this message
Mark W. Tomlinson (mark-tomlinson) wrote :

Micah - the sdx naming convention has continued, up to and including Feisty. And, no, it doesn't seem to pose a problem - the change just took me by surprise. As far as I'm concerned, this one can be closed.

Thanks!

Revision history for this message
Micah Cowan (micahcowan) wrote :

Thanks, Mark.

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

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.