Indeed the screenshots in the original post are gone. @Wimpress do you know what happened there?
I’ve seen images disappear on the snapcraft forum too. This coincided with a change to the AWS bucket configuration. I think you’ll need to speak to IS @oSoMoN
1 Like
Fixed! Thanks @oSoMoN & @tai271828
1 Like
when will we find it on an Ubuntu ISO?
@corradoventu - If you like, here is an early iso - http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/daily-canary/pending/ - but bear in mind this stuff is missing bare-minimum essential features, so don’t expect it usable yet.
2 Likes
Downloaded ISO and started install but the install window ‘Keyboard layout’ is empty (Because I have an Italian keyboard?) and also pressing ‘continue’ has no effect
Note: in the same ISO the other installer (ubiquity) works fine.
21.10 is old installer 
Yes, because the new installer is still very much in development, it’s not ready for general consumption yet. But if you feel adventurous and want to provide feedback, you can download a canary ISO, where the new installer is the default.
3 Likes
Try install in virtualbox from ISO dated 20211025.
The install completes but fails at end.
Screenshots and log here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NYCCqL5GxQfiHSbS8hZvpLUUKLMeKWHb
1 Like
@corradoventu - looks like at the time you installed, the Jammy archive was unhappy as some of the packages failed to download.
E: Package 'efibootmgr' has no installation candidate
E: Package 'grub-efi-amd64' has no installation candidate
E: Unable to locate package grub-efi-amd64-signed
E: Package 'shim-signed' has no installation candidate
We’ve got an impish version of the daily-canary that you might be interested in.
The new install worked fine, thanks. If my tests are useful I will repeat them, let me know.
Screenshots and log here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-YRlVMPIeTfkUOebpyWvfBCJm3h2JriE?usp=sharing
so far I have tested in virtual box, do you think it is safe to install in a dedicated partition?
1 Like
@corradoventu - the tests are useful. Your log helped point out jammy vs impish differences. And I appreciate that you tarred up the entire log directory, that made it easy to diagnose.
do you think it is safe to install in a dedicated partition?
Even production installers advise you to back up important data before use, and this one isn’t production yet 
. But I think you can do this, but please be careful which partitions you agree to format.
Before I said yes I ran thru an install with real hardware, testing a real dual-boot (linux / linux) case. I ran into the following caveats:
- I also ran into the same apt issue you did, but with the impish image. I suspect offline install is a little broken and will look into it.
- to work around this, I setup networking. I had to manually
ubuntu-drivers installin the install environment, then things were fine. - ubuntu-desktop-installer/subiquity cannot yet cope with repartitioning scenarios like resizing a partition or even creating a new one in free space, so you may have to use a partitioning tool ahead of time to work around this. I used the ‘Disks’ utility, which is available in the installer live environment. I then used the installer Manual partitioning steps to pick up the existing EFI partition, and install to the new partition I created.
1 Like
Try install in preallocated partition on nvme disk
snap:ubuntu-desktop-installer stable/ubuntu-22.04 133
i stopped install because last screen ‘Write changes to disk’ does not specify the partitions to be formatted.
Problems?
screen Updates and other software
does not propose Updates and other third-party software
screen Installation type
does not propose ‘Install Ubuntu alongside them’
screen Allocate disk space
does not show device for boot
seems not recognising the swap partition existing on a different disk of same PC and automatically assumed as swap from Ubiquity
note: same problems also trying install on SSD disk partition sda2
link: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AC107yOlvi65yFWlvcZXK42gHfVkxOPI?usp=sharing
corrado@corrado-jj-1023:~$ sudo lsblk -o NAME,LABEL,SIZE,FSUSE%,FSTYPE,MOUNTPOINT
[sudo] password for corrado:
NAME LABEL SIZE FSUSE% FSTYPE MOUNTPOINT
loop0 99,4M 100% squashfs /snap/core/11993
loop1 61,8M 100% squashfs /snap/core20/1169
loop2 150,4M 100% squashfs /snap/firefox/631
loop3 4K 100% squashfs /snap/bare/5
loop4 65,2M 100% squashfs /snap/gtk-common-themes/1519
loop5 242,3M 100% squashfs /snap/gnome-3-38-2004/76
loop6 54,2M 100% squashfs /snap/snap-store/554
sda 465,8G
├─sda1 p1-focal 32G ext4
├─sda2 share1 32G ext4
├─sda3 backupp 369,9G 24% ext4 /media/corrado/backupp
├─sda4 8G swap [SWAP]
└─sda5 share2 23,9G ext4
sr0 1024M
nvme0n1 476,9G
├─nvme0n1p1 ESP 250M 19% vfat /boot/efi
├─nvme0n1p2 n2-focal 48G ext4
├─nvme0n1p3 n3-jj-1025 48G 42% ext4 /
├─nvme0n1p4 n4-ii-beta 48G ext4
├─nvme0n1p5 n5-impish 48G ext4
├─nvme0n1p6 DELLSUPPORT 1,8G ntfs
└─nvme0n1p7 dati 282,9G ext4
corrado@corrado-jj-1023:~$I am trying to figure out whether the adoption of subiquity here means that we can also use Cloud Init.
I am trying a Packer build with the boot_command shown below. The logic is to press c to get to the grub> prompt, and then enter the other commands as shown.
As a means to boot, that works, in that the VM boots, and the net.iframes option is applied (interfaces are named eth0…).
What does not seem to work is the ds option. There is no /var/log/installer or /var/lib/cloud, so no log files, which implies no Cloud Init, I think.
The /proc/cmdline is what I expect.
Should this be working?
boot_command = [
"c",
"linux /casper/vmlinuz \"ds=nocloud-net;seedfrom=http://{{.HTTPIP}}:{{.HTTPPort}}/\" net.ifnames=0 autoinstall quiet --- ",
"<enter><wait>",
"initrd /casper/initrd<enter><wait>",
"boot<enter>"
]
This does work with this image:
https://cdimage.ubuntu.com/impish/daily-canary/pending/impish-desktop-canary-amd64.iso
In the sense that the user-data is being read.
There are problems with my user-data that I shall need to debug. I’d rather debug those problems with a build that has a higher level of quality than a canary build.
I did try this image:
https://releases.ubuntu.com/21.10/ubuntu-21.10-desktop-amd64.iso
But the user-data was not being read.
So, is there a suitable image that I can test from the “impish” releases that has a higher level of quality than the canary release please?
Thanks
Nathan
As an update, with this image:
https://releases.ubuntu.com/21.10/ubuntu-21.10-live-server-amd64.iso
The same user-data works as expected.
There are 2 discussions about Ubuntu Desktop Installer. Which is the right one? Why two? Wouldn’t it be better to unify them?
2 Likes
A sensible suggestion by @corradoventu, as this thread was originally about the building-blocks and progress of creating the new installer.
Now that this software has been created and is in testing, let’s move discussion to the existing testing and discussion thread: New Desktop Installer Preview Build
If I’m mistaken and somebody really wants this thread left open, PM me and I’m happy to revert.