New LTS, new FS?

[laserburn2]

Considering that Ubuntu 24.04 is coming with kernel that supports bcachefs, are we going to see in the installer an option to use the new filesystem? I am generally adventurous enough to try new filesystems, as long as there is reasonable expectations that it won't break on my simple home configuration (one nvme stick). I was one of the early btrfs users on Ubuntu, which wrecked the system.

Currently, I'm on zfs, which is working great, except for the fact that Ubuntu installer is making bpool way too small and there is no option to change that. We tried to kick up some fuss and raise awareness of the problem, but it all fell on silent ears and I doubt it got addressed in the 24.04. Maybe someone could check.
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2491291

[jbicha]

Ubuntu developers have higher priorities right now than making it easier for people to wreck their system with experimental filesystems.

I mean you're basically asking for additional features in the installer, but the people working on the installer are very busy with getting it to work for official Ubuntu flavors and support OEM configuration. There just isn't time for anything extra.

[ian-weisser]

Experimentation of this sort is rare during an LTS release.

It is more common during the non-LTS releases.

And is most likely to happen when community members pitch in. Lot of work to be done.

If you wish to check on a reported bug, please check the bug tracker.

[MAFoElffen]

Ubuntu developers have higher priorities right now than making it easier for people to wreck their system with experimental filesystems.

I mean you're basically asking for additional features in the installer, but the people working on the installer are very busy with getting it to work for official Ubuntu flavors and support OEM configuration. There just isn't time for anything extra.

I'm still waiting for resolution of filesystem and volume manger features "we lost" with the new partitioner of the new installer = recognizing existing LVM and LUKS containers. That has been in bug reports, issues, and enhancement requests. No one (yet) has been willing to tell me what the new partitioner actually "is" so I can look into it on my own. Those have been in issues and launchpad questions.

*** I agree on the timing. Very well said. An LTS cycle is not the time for that.

[laserburn2]

I'm reading on Phoronix that new installer can install zfs on root, even encryption is supported. I believe there is no longer a separate volume for /boot and zsys is out. I have no idea how they implemented zfs on Ubuntu 24.04, do they now use zfsbootmenu or what? If anyone tried new Ubuntu beta or knows more on the subject, I'd appreciate some feedback.

[1fallen]

I'm reading on Phoronix that new installer can install zfs on root,

Yes

even encryption is supported.

Todays .iso 4-19-2024 encryption is still broken, at least on my end.

I believe there is no longer a separate volume for /boot and zsys is out. I have no idea how they implemented zfs on Ubuntu 24.04, do they now use zfsbootmenu or what? If anyone tried new Ubuntu beta or knows more on the subject, I'd appreciate some feedback.

Not Quite:

inxi -p | grep bpool
    logical: bpool/BOOT/ubuntu_ntiqi9

And zsys is still in the repos:

 apt policy zsys
zsys:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 0.5.11.3build1
  Version table:
     0.5.11.3build1 500
        500 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu noble/main amd64 Packages

Mine in total is laid out like this:

ID-1: / size: 440.28 GiB used: 4.59 GiB (1.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-2: /boot size: 1.75 GiB used: 95.4 MiB (5.3%) fs: zfs
  ID-3: /boot/efi size: 1.05 GiB used: 6.1 MiB (0.6%) fs: vfat
  ID-4: /home size: 436.11 GiB used: 427 MiB (0.1%) fs: zfs
  ID-5: /root size: 435.69 GiB used: 1.1 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-6: /srv size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-7: /usr/local size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-8: /var/games size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-9: /var/lib size: 436.76 GiB used: 1.07 GiB (0.2%) fs: zfs
    fs: zfs logical: rpool/ROOT/ubuntu_ntiqi9/var/lib/AccountsService
    fs: zfs logical: rpool/ROOT/ubuntu_ntiqi9/var/lib/NetworkManager
  ID-12: /var/lib/apt size: 435.76 GiB used: 70.1 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-13: /var/lib/dpkg size: 435.72 GiB used: 37.4 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-14: /var/log size: 435.69 GiB used: 4.4 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-15: /var/mail size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-16: /var/spool size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-17: /var/www size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-18: swap-1 size: 4 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda3

Others will vary according to how they install it.

[MAFoElffen]

Ubuntu developers have higher priorities right now than making it easier for people to wreck their system with experimental filesystems.

I mean you're basically asking for additional features in the installer, but the people working on the installer are very busy with getting it to work for official Ubuntu flavors and support OEM configuration. There just isn't time for anything extra.

@jbicha ---

Sorry that this has hit the sensitivity underpinnings of my frustration. Nothing meant as personal at all...

I have asked for over a year on info on the newer partitioner, and scripts to be able to flip over to a console to change manually the size bpool and the EFI partitions during the canned ZFS install... Since no one would answer... I have done traces and debugging on my own to see what it does and how it works. Trying different things to get it to do what I can underneath it.

I filed issues at the ubuntu-desktop-installer github, questions at Launchpad. It did fall on "deaf ears". It used to be easy with subuiquity. With Flutter, another experience.

Alongside of that, there is an old bug report on the newer partitioner, as it relates to LVM2, and that it doesn't recognise things that are there, besides basic partitions. With the older partitioner, you could do LVM, and LUKS containers in console, start up the partitoner, and it would see what was there, and then fire up the installer, point the partitioner to the mounts you wanted to use for the filesystem, and have it continue the install using those mounts.

That is not there anymore with the current partitioner. No one above us seems to care about that, nor the possibilities it ave us, that are not there anymore.

The only other option to do that with the newer installer is using the Live Installer and it's scripts.

Or to do as I do, with using the Installer's LiveUSB's Live Image Environment (L.I.E.) as just that, create the environment and layouts, and either rsync or debootstrap the system into the created framework. That is how I usually do things, "manually"... But others, using the subiquity installer worked that way, so they noticed that doesn't work any longer and they have lost the ability to do many things. I said I would try to help...

I can see where the DEV's are too busy for any of us, or to hear what we have to ask or say... Heck, after visiting the Issue Section of the ubuntu-desktop-installer GitHub, after seeing that issues were not being addressed (and me helping others there), I filed an issue on "that" as a Specific Issue. But changing priorities are a continual cycle. Life happens.

I started asking these questions during the Lunar Dev Cycle, when we went to the newer installer. Then we went to DEV Mantic, then DEV Noble... After Noble releases, then we just start another DEV Cycle for 24.10, and the priority is on that right? While those things are still unanswered, and not addressed. It's like they get ignored and pushed to the side.

It's not just ZFS or BTRFS, or some other exotic filesystem. It's the underlying toolset, and how it does not recognize what is there. It's LVM2, and LUKS, and many other things that have been around in Linux for many, many years. Canonical said it was working on the partitioner. They can't even tell people what it is, nor has anything been done to improve it (nor add the promised features) in the past year and a half. Just what is the schedule on that?

Yes, sorry. A bit of frustration with that. It spilled out in a gush. I'll just go back to my corner and lick my wounds in silence.

[laserburn2]

Mine in total is laid out like this:

ID-1: / size: 440.28 GiB used: 4.59 GiB (1.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-2: /boot size: 1.75 GiB used: 95.4 MiB (5.3%) fs: zfs
  ID-3: /boot/efi size: 1.05 GiB used: 6.1 MiB (0.6%) fs: vfat
  ID-4: /home size: 436.11 GiB used: 427 MiB (0.1%) fs: zfs
  ID-5: /root size: 435.69 GiB used: 1.1 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-6: /srv size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-7: /usr/local size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-8: /var/games size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-9: /var/lib size: 436.76 GiB used: 1.07 GiB (0.2%) fs: zfs
    fs: zfs logical: rpool/ROOT/ubuntu_ntiqi9/var/lib/AccountsService
    fs: zfs logical: rpool/ROOT/ubuntu_ntiqi9/var/lib/NetworkManager
  ID-12: /var/lib/apt size: 435.76 GiB used: 70.1 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-13: /var/lib/dpkg size: 435.72 GiB used: 37.4 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-14: /var/log size: 435.69 GiB used: 4.4 MiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-15: /var/mail size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-16: /var/spool size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-17: /var/www size: 435.69 GiB used: 128 KiB (0.0%) fs: zfs
  ID-18: swap-1 size: 4 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda3

Others will vary according to how they install it.

I got an important question. Did the installer allow you to change any of those sizes or could you just let it do everything automatically as it sees fit? Could you change the size of bpool or /boot?

[1fallen]

I let the installer size it, manual partitioning did not work for me yet.

[jbicha]

I mean I personally don't have time to help with implementing new filesystem details as I'm quite busy with other desktop responsibilities. The Ubuntu Desktop Installer team is small and have been working on more important issues this release cycle. For instance, the new desktop installer framework is now used by all the desktop flavors except for Kubuntu, Lubuntu, and Ubuntu Unity. That wasn't really possible with 23.10.

There are quite a few other bugs in the desktop installer beyond your bugs. Sorry.

The new installer now makes it very visible that you can use a file to automate your install. Maybe that supports complex file system organization?