Ubuntu Version: 25.04
Desktop Environment ¿GNOME?
Problem Description: I Installed ¿Xubuntu? from ISO Xubuntu 25.04 (Plucky Puffin) Daily Build.
I was expecting an xfce desktop but instead I got GNOME
From https://cdimages.ubuntu.com/xubuntu/daily-live/pending/plucky-desktop-amd64.manifest
i see many xfce components but where did they end up?
Yep I had the same showing…I just canceled the install. And went with an older .iso I knew was Xubuntu.
Is there a bug report for this?
I did not bother, that is just a silly mistake…Sigh!
Hopefully, will be fixed in the next daily build.
I would suggest filing a bug against xubuntu-default-settings and reporting it on the ISO tracker. That’s a pretty egregious error.
Yes please report it as a bug like wxl suggested that is one of the reasons we have a development category.
Thanks
corrado@corrado-a6-xubuntu:~$ apt policy xubuntu-default-settings
xubuntu-default-settings:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: 25.04.1
Version table:
25.04.1 500
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu plucky/universe amd64 Packages
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu plucky/universe i386 Packages
corrado@corrado-a6-xubuntu:~$
https://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/464/builds/325846/testcases/1302/results/
Strange. Just tried installing the ISO of 20250311 and I get a standard XFCE desktop. The live ISO itself seemed nothing out of the ordinary, either. Yes, I did check the date on it.
I have a meeting shortly, so can’t investigate further right now, but can look at it later if necessary.
Manifest shows the GNOME Snap but we have that in Lubuntu and no GNOME so that’s not it.
Also there are some GNOME packages but they were in Xubuntu 24.10 so that’s probably not it, either.
@corradoventu Do you zsync, torrent or http your ISOs?
Downloaded by http and installed from dasd thru /etc/grub.d/40_custom as i do to install Ubuntu.
I tried again with today’s ISO Mar 12, the live version is also in GNOME
Using the ISO from Xubuntu 25.04 (Plucky Puffin) Daily Build the live session is xfce
I tried with the March 12 ISO current version (which I believe is the same as pending) and installed it on my beat-up old Acer Travelmate 4740. Both live session and installed version are XFCE.
I use zsync and occasionally rsync to get the ISO files.
Install from dasd via /etc/grub.d/40_custom Ubuntu and Xubuntu minimal works fine but Xubuntu desktop gives the above problem.
Install Xubuntu desktop from USB key works fine.
So i think this bug may be closed as Invalid.
This (or torrent) is what I would suggest. Both methods have a built-in mechanism to verify the image (and fix it if invalid).
Unless you separately verified the image, my guess is download errors have resulted in a corruption. Remember one bit (switching from 0 to 1 or vice versa) could lead to problematic and unpredictable behavior.
Excuse my ignorance but is that a supported installation mechanism? Are there test cases that specifically deal with that?
Yes if you look to /etc/grub.d/40_custom (un Ubuntu, Debian and Xubuntu) you will see:
#!/bin/sh
exec tail -n +3 $0
# This file provides an easy way to add custom menu entries. Simply type the
# menu entries you want to add after this comment. Be careful not to change
# the 'exec tail' line above.
My 40_custom is as follows:
corrado@corrado-n6-pp-0311:~$ cat /etc/grub.d/40_custom
#!/bin/sh
exec tail -n +3 $0
# This file provides an easy way to add custom menu entries. Simply type the
# menu entries you want to add after this comment. Be careful not to change
# the 'exec tail' line above.
menuentry "Ubuntu Plucky Desktop ISO" {
loopback loop /home/corrado/Downloads/plucky-desktop-amd64.iso
linux (loop)/casper/vmlinuz boot=casper iso-scan/filename=/home/corrado/Downloads/plucky-desktop-amd64.iso noeject noprompt splash --
initrd (loop)/casper/initrd
}
corrado@corrado-n6-pp-0311:~$
It works fine with MOST ISOs but fails with some.
E.G. it worked for ISO of Debian and all Ubuntu ISOs. For Xubuntu was ok for the daily-minimal but NOT for the daily-live
I don’t see anything about that to suggest that there are test cases supporting it. Yes, I see that GRUB can handle custom entries but when I say “supported,” I mean more the idea that the Ubuntu ecosystem is actively supporting it. As an example: Lubuntu includes an LXQt session, but we never test it. The LXQt packages certainly support it, and we’re probably the major contributors to those packages, but I can’t say we support it. If people file bugs on it, we might get to them at some point if free time allows, but I think we would largely ignore them.
Also: why? If it only works some of the time, what’s the point?
See my above post above where I said:
Grub 2 manual says
GNU GRUB Manual 2.12: Simple configuration
d/40_custom is particularly useful for adding entire custom menu entries; simply type the menu entries you want to add at the end of that file, making sure to …
But if my 40_custom works for most ISOs it should work always.
May be my 40_custom contains some error not accepted by SOME ISOs
So I was hoping to find some expert locking at my 40_custom to suggest some enhancement.
I might agree that as far as Xubuntu being buggy it’s invalid. I continued the discussion because I saw some value beyond that. It seems like you do, too.
I agree with this idea and it’s worth investigating. That’s why I started with trying to understand your particular usecase. So what’s the value in doing this?
Avoid to create the USB key and install directly after download the ISO.
The install from dasd is much faster.
I don’t know if I use bad USB keys but i see that they break easily when using them to load ISOs.
During development o a new version i download and test a new ISO each 10-15 days to report result to Testing tracker | Ubuntu QA
See: Grub2/CustomMenus - Community Help Wiki
Searching for info to respond to your question i found:
Grub2/ISOBoot - Community Help Wiki
that suggest a tool grml-rescueboot package to automatically create the menuentry,
I tested it and it worked well with the Plucky iso dated Jan 28 and Mar 06
BUT NON wit ISO dated Mar 13 and 14.
This result confirms my preceding result with my ‘hand made’ 40_custom
Any idea to debug the problem?
thanks
Note: with the ISO dated Mar 13 and 14 the sha256sum are ok, the ISO boots with a wrong resolution and then crashes after the install is started.
Retry with ISO dated Mar 15: the installer from dasd starts wit wrong resolution and crashes,
the install from an USB key starts with the correct resolution and install is successful.