Written by vinlos the 29 Feb 08 at 10:46.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #1242 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #1242 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Hetor the 31 Mar 09 at 12:57.

Create an option for installation disk that will install just Ubuntu's boot menu to make Ubuntu accessible after Windows installation.

Create an option for installation disk that will install just Ubuntu's boot menu to make Ubuntu accessible after Windows installation.

Written by stoffel the 31 Mar 09 at 21:39.

So, similar as the first solution, but with these differences:
* people do not understand "boot menu"
* it puts focus on the fact that the Windows installer is crap that can break the user's system, whilst at the same time pointing out Ubuntu has the tools to fix this crap

So, similar as the first solution, but with these differences: * people do not understand "boot menu" * it puts focus on the fact that the Windows installer is crap that can break the user's system, whilst at the same time pointing out Ubuntu has the tools to fix this crap

Written by cheesehead the 31 Mar 09 at 21:50.

LiveCD should check for an existing MBR or grub, and offer to reinstall grub only if the LiveCD finds an MBR or broken grub

LiveCD should check for an existing MBR or grub, and offer to reinstall grub only if the LiveCD finds an MBR or broken grub

Written by supermorph the 3 Apr 09 at 18:26.

as an option as WELL as placing grub into mbr , i would suggest Making a DUPLICATE of the mbr and place the mbr file in windows boot.ini and the vista bootmgr menu's (should windows be located in the install)

i had to re-do somebodys system, they was very dubious on linux (they had another distro and it didnt do wireless, so they over generalised and thought gnu/linux as a whole was not good) and i suggested to fix thier pc,
they left it with me, so i put thier media-centre xp first, all thier apps how they liked, installed a hidden user for me, and installed jaunty 9.04 at the end of the hdd, and made the users exactly like the xp, (both with firefox, and wine 4 ubuntu) i also took the liberty of extracting the installed mbr of ubuntu to a file "ubuntu.mbr" i called it, and placed it into thier xp partition (hidded,system applied) and added a menu "Ubuntu Linux" to thier boot.ini as the second option, i then proceeded to make a recovery image of this setup and put it to four dvd's with all of the dvd's bootable to a registered acronis 8 personal of myne, so if they restore it will ALWAYS work, and if they need whats on there they can remove the mbr and STILL use ubuntu (or put it back if they ask how to do it)

mabye this could be done, and add an option to restore this mbr file to the hdd in recovery mode on the live/alt disks?

sorry for the long post, but i think it will actually help because of the way i done things, theres no way ubuntu cannot be run in that configuration.

as an option as WELL as placing grub into mbr , i would suggest Making a DUPLICATE of the mbr and place the mbr file in windows boot.ini and the vista bootmgr menu's (should windows be located in the install) i had to re-do somebodys system, they was very dubious on linux (they had another distro and it didnt do wireless, so they over generalised and thought gnu/linux as a whole was not good) and i suggested to fix thier pc, they left it with me, so i put thier media-centre xp first, all thier apps how they liked, installed a hidden user for me, and installed jaunty 9.04 at the end of the hdd, and made the users exactly like the xp, (both with firefox, and wine 4 ubuntu) i also took the liberty of extracting the installed mbr of ubuntu to a file "ubuntu.mbr" i called it, and placed it into thier xp partition (hidded,system applied) and added a menu "Ubuntu Linux" to thier boot.ini as the second option, i then proceeded to make a recovery image of this setup and put it to four dvd's with all of the dvd's bootable to a registered acronis 8 personal of myne, so if they restore it will ALWAYS work, and if they need whats on there they can remove the mbr and STILL use ubuntu (or put it back if they ask how to do it) mabye this could be done, and add an option to restore this mbr file to the hdd in recovery mode on the live/alt disks? sorry for the long post, but i think it will actually help because of the way i done things, theres no way ubuntu cannot be run in that configuration. kind regards supermorph

Written by jamesisin the 7 Apr 09 at 06:38.

Create an ISO available to Ubuntu users (linked probably in the Help menu &c) which has been set up specifically for repairing version x.y of Ubuntu.

(Part of my "Keep the installer trim" philosophy.)

Create an ISO available to Ubuntu users (linked probably in the Help menu &c) which has been set up specifically for repairing version x.y of Ubuntu. (Part of my "Keep the installer trim" philosophy.)

Written by codeslicer the 27 Feb 09 at 20:33.

One of the options for a bootable partition in GParted would be to Reinstall Boot Manager, after which an option to install either GRUB or LILO on to the hard partition.

One of the options for a bootable partition in GParted would be to Reinstall Boot Manager, after which an option to install either GRUB or LILO on to the hard partition.

Written by TheLions the 1 Mar 09 at 20:41.

instead making repairing tool why not include a easy-to-understeand-do-it-yourself guide how to repair GRUB?

instead making repairing tool why not include a easy-to-understeand-do-it-yourself guide how to repair GRUB?

Written by josinalvo the 7 Mar 09 at 04:08.

There is a windows app called super grub disk that is able to solve the problem (The odd name comes from a live cd that does the same job)

I propose this app should be on the livecd, on that part that is acessible from windows (a.k.a. outside squashfs)

There is a windows app called super grub disk that is able to solve the problem (The odd name comes from a live cd that does the same job) I propose this app should be on the livecd, on that part that is acessible from windows (a.k.a. outside squashfs)

Written by pengo the 9 Mar 09 at 02:25.

This will probably get voted down for mentioning MICROSOFT, but as this problem is generally a problem with Windows rudely taking over from Grub, why not make a Windows application that installs or restores GRUB?

This will probably get voted down for mentioning MICROSOFT, but as this problem is generally a problem with Windows rudely taking over from Grub, why not make a Windows application that installs or restores GRUB?

Written by jekristiansen the 10 Jan 10 at 01:45.

It would be nice if there was an option to re-install boot loaders for both Ubuntu and Windows. Remove Ubuntu + Grub, and the Windows boot is missing.
Install Windows, and there's no Grub
I installed windows again because of that...

It would be nice if there was an option to re-install boot loaders for both Ubuntu and Windows. Remove Ubuntu + Grub, and the Windows boot is missing. Install Windows, and there's no Grub I installed windows again because of that...

Written by LordHawke13 the 8 Feb 10 at 04:34.

I suggest an application that will run the contents of a boot disk either to an internal guest display (as in a Virtual Machine) or to an attached external display (like a second monitor) to install an operating system for dual booting. Since it can be done from inside the host OS, it can suppress the secondary OS' process of overwriting the MBR, preserving the primary bootloader, and optionally writing entries to the bootloader's boot menu for chainloading the secondary OS. Such an app would eliminate the need of a bootable LiveCD as the bootloader will be intact and in no need of restoration.

I suggest an application that will run the contents of a boot disk either to an internal guest display (as in a Virtual Machine) or to an attached external display (like a second monitor) to install an operating system for dual booting. Since it can be done from inside the host OS, it can suppress the secondary OS' process of overwriting the MBR, preserving the primary bootloader, and optionally writing entries to the bootloader's boot menu for chainloading the secondary OS. Such an app would eliminate the need of a bootable LiveCD as the bootloader will be intact and in no need of restoration.

Written by pfelelep the 15 Feb 10 at 07:40.

25 years ago today, I was able to simply change mac os 6 boot folder by just removing or adding the Finder file. That was useable.
25 years ago today I was able to repair most non booting DOS issues by just typing SYS C: That was almost useable.

What do we have in 2010 ? A OS that breaks its own bootloader when you try to update it. And that's when you managed to install it in the first place... And if you're to fix it (I guess most debuting users will just wipe their disk and start over again from here) you have to download 3 different discs to try from (live, alt, supergrub) . That's progress I guess ?

Grub is excellent software, but its useability and reliability need to be reinforced !

What I need on the install disc is a tool that lets me :
step 1 : describe partitions in my system. no installer or tool can guess that stuff in a mildly sophisticated system. there could also be an automatic mode for simple 1 or 2 partition setups. LVM should always be natively supported.
Step 2 : choose mbr or grub partition target
Step 3 : Click Fix and reboot !

25 years ago today, I was able to simply change mac os 6 boot folder by just removing or adding the Finder file. That was useable. 25 years ago today I was able to repair most non booting DOS issues by just typing SYS C: That was almost useable. What do we have in 2010 ? A OS that breaks its own bootloader when you try to update it. And that's when you managed to install it in the first place... And if you're to fix it (I guess most debuting users will just wipe their disk and start over again from here) you have to download 3 different discs to try from (live, alt, supergrub) . That's progress I guess ? Grub is excellent software, but its useability and reliability need to be reinforced ! What I need on the install disc is a tool that lets me : step 1 : describe partitions in my system. no installer or tool can guess that stuff in a mildly sophisticated system. there could also be an automatic mode for simple 1 or 2 partition setups. LVM should always be natively supported. Step 2 : choose mbr or grub partition target Step 3 : Click Fix and reboot !

Written by leorolla the 11 Mar 10 at 17:26.

People who try Ubuntu for one day (perhaps because a friend insisted) and then decide to wipe it out, find themselves desperate when they realize that their computer is not working at all.
And they say that it's Ubuntu's fault!
And they are right!
In fact it is the installation of Ubuntu that has just broken the user's system.

If this or that OS is crap, it will be obvious from the facts. It is for the user, and only for the user, to come up with that conclusion.

What Ubuntu has to do is to be as good as it can, and other OS's won't provide equivalent tools.
As for today, they don't come even close, but who knows...

If an Ubuntu application will propose the user to "fix" the MBR, it should propose to "fix" the MBR in both directions: to replace the current MBR by Grub, or to replace it by another OS's bootloader.

No matter if it will do it at the Live CD, a Desktop application or an application to be run inside other OS's, it should offer both possibilities.

This would make Ubuntu inarguably superior.

People who try Ubuntu for one day (perhaps because a friend insisted) and then decide to wipe it out, find themselves desperate when they realize that their computer is not working at all. And they say that it's Ubuntu's fault! And they are right! In fact it is the installation of Ubuntu that has just broken the user's system. If this or that OS is crap, it will be obvious from the facts. It is for the user, and only for the user, to come up with that conclusion. What Ubuntu has to do is to be as good as it can, and other OS's won't provide equivalent tools. As for today, they don't come even close, but who knows... If an Ubuntu application will propose the user to "fix" the MBR, it should propose to "fix" the MBR in both directions: to replace the current MBR by Grub, or to replace it by another OS's bootloader. No matter if it will do it at the Live CD, a Desktop application or an application to be run inside other OS's, it should offer both possibilities. This would make Ubuntu inarguably superior. If the user chooses to fix the MBR using another OS's bootloader, and the application can still detect that some Linux partition, then it should implement an ingenious procedure to chainload Grub from the other OS (as described at Solution #5, for the case of Windows).

Written by checoimg the 1 Feb 11 at 03:06.

Auto restoring option on grub (don't tell me if it is posible or not).
Make Grub Reinstall itself until you enter Ubuntu and change that option, so after any change grub will overwrite the new loader and persist to be the used loader. Of course updating the list of OS and maybe add on Gparted a detct OS option in case of problems detecting new OS installed on same Hard Disk

Auto restoring option on grub (don't tell me if it is posible or not). Make Grub Reinstall itself until you enter Ubuntu and change that option, so after any change grub will overwrite the new loader and persist to be the used loader. Of course updating the list of OS and maybe add on Gparted a detct OS option in case of problems detecting new OS installed on same Hard Disk

Written by alpikat the 16 Apr 08 at 13:20.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #7108 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #7108 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Cé the 18 Feb 09 at 20:03.

Could synaptic be changed that it only locks the database during the actual install, not during marking or downloading of packages?

Could synaptic be changed that it only locks the database during the actual install, not during marking or downloading of packages?

Written by Warbo the 19 Feb 09 at 18:29.

Rather than package management applications locking the package manager, they could be able to run at once, talking to a daemon in the background which stores the marked packages and does the installing and removing. Users will not need or want to run multiple daemons, since they shouldn't have to even know that the daemon's there, however multiple package manager instances is an often-encountered, user-visible error/warning.

Rather than package management applications locking the package manager, they could be able to run at once, talking to a daemon in the background which stores the marked packages and does the installing and removing. Users will not need or want to run multiple daemons, since they shouldn't have to even know that the daemon's there, however multiple package manager instances is an often-encountered, user-visible error/warning.

Written by pengo the 9 Mar 09 at 02:44.

If you're only installing stuff, then queue up the operations. After one finishes installing, the other one can start automatically.

If you're only installing stuff, then queue up the operations. After one finishes installing, the other one can start automatically.

Written by pengo the 9 Mar 09 at 02:50.

Allow finer locks on the database so that operations that don't conflict (like most installing of applications) can both happen simultaneously.

Allow finer locks on the database so that operations that don't conflict (like most installing of applications) can both happen simultaneously.

Written by Nate_the_Ace the 20 Jun 10 at 01:18.

I would like to see a queue in the "In Progress" window that can be dragged to reorder the installation order of the applications.

Maybe not reorder the installation in progress, but the ones that will come next.

I would like to see a queue in the "In Progress" window that can be dragged to reorder the installation order of the applications. Maybe not reorder the installation in progress, but the ones that will come next.

Written by twocool the 17 Mar 09 at 00:09.

That daemon could have a queue.
The only problem with this is that it can lead to conflicts, like a user starting the installation of software #1 and then trying to install software #2 which is incompatible with software #1, so the daemon should detect this kind of situation.

That daemon could have a queue. The only problem with this is that it can lead to conflicts, like a user starting the installation of software #1 and then trying to install software #2 which is incompatible with software #1, so the daemon should detect this kind of situation.

Written by pengo the 7 Aug 08 at 00:20.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11921 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #11921 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by pengo the 23 Dec 08 at 11:28.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #16765 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #16765 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by pengo the 5 Aug 08 at 22:19.

Please add channel selection. Automatically channel finding can be unreliable, and I've found it to simply not work.

Make the interface as simple as possible BUT NO SIMPLER. Please.

Please add channel selection. Automatically channel finding can be unreliable, and I've found it to simply not work. Make the interface as simple as possible BUT NO SIMPLER. Please.

Written by pengo the 6 Aug 08 at 23:57.

I'd like to have more fine grained control of the thumbnailing process in Nautilus.

e.g. to see which program has taken control of making thumbnails of the Nikon RAW (.nef) files. One program gives them black borders while another doesn't. I don't know which does which, but I'd like to be able to select between them somewhere.

The helpers used for thumbnails would be generally useful for system admins to be able to configure too.

I'd like to have more fine grained control of the thumbnailing process in Nautilus. e.g. to see which program has taken control of making thumbnails of the Nikon RAW (.nef) files. One program gives them black borders while another doesn't. I don't know which does which, but I'd like to be able to select between them somewhere. The helpers used for thumbnails would be generally useful for system admins to be able to configure too.

Written by pengo the 5 Aug 08 at 22:32.

Fix the login screen so that the username and password appear on separate lines -- instead of both appearing in the same place.

Fixing this would mean users get less confused and the interface would be more intuitive.

Fix the login screen so that the username and password appear on separate lines -- instead of both appearing in the same place. Fixing this would mean users get less confused and the interface would be more intuitive.