Bug 6165 - Installation of plasma5 destroy the whole disk setup
: Installation of plasma5 destroy the whole disk setup
Product: Desktop Bugs
Classification: ROSA Desktop
Component: Main Packages
: unspecified
: All Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: ROSA Linux Bugs
: ROSA Linux Bugs
Depends on:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2015-09-12 18:19 MSD by Shalok Shalom
Modified: 2015-09-15 21:44 MSD (History)
0 users

See Also:
RPM Package:
Bad POT generating:


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Shalok Shalom 2015-09-12 18:19:31 MSD
First of: I am of course aware about the facts, that this ISO is just for testing and its of course possible, that i cause this issue.

I download and install this ISO: 


The HDD contains 3 different OS, i replace sda1 and sda2, for the plasma 5 ISO.

After the restart put me GRUB in console and gparted cant detect any of my partitions anymore. http://funkyimg.com/view/21ZrG

When i install R6, appear this message:


And then:

<< I cannot read the partition table of device sda, it's too corrupted for me :(
I can try to go on, erasing over bad partitions (ALL DATA will be lost!).
The other solution is to not allow DrakX to modify the partition table.
(the error is extended partition: bad magic number on disk sda. >>

Do you agree to lose all the partitions?

To be honest: I didnt check the md5sum, so it might be a broken ISO.

If thats the case, is it imho even more important to implement something like this: http://bugs.rosalinux.ru/show_bug.cgi?id=5991
Comment 1 Shalok Shalom 2015-09-12 18:24:50 MSD
I mean, GRUB2 put me in its rescue mode, with "in console".

I will try to rescue data with Qphotorec, just want to mention that case to help repair the plasma 5 ISO, while i am unsure, what (if) the ISO/DE have to do with this case, since i guess that DrakX itself use the same version ?

Comment 2 Shalok Shalom 2015-09-13 10:32:27 MSD
Ok, Qphotorec seems to detect more as gparted does: http://funkyimg.com/view/221oV

Is it possible, that btrfs cause this issue ?