Startup Disc Creator

[Nio Wiklund]

Den 2016-09-11 kl. 12:34, skrev Nio Wiklund:
> Den 2016-09-08 kl. 20:14, skrev Nio Wiklund:
>> Den 2016-09-08 kl. 20:12, skrev Nio Wiklund:
>>> Den 2016-09-08 kl. 19:55, skrev Alberto Salvia Novella:
>>>> Ian Bruntlett:
>>>>> The flash drive is not being recognised. To quote GPartEd, "Unable to
>>>>> detect file system!".
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone else have this problem?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I have. I thought the device was broken.
>>>>
>>>> Please open a new report about it, and I will confirm and triage it for
>>>> you.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks 👍
>>>
>>> Hi Alberto,
>>>
>>> This is by intention: This way to create USB boot drives, cloning, is
>>> very robust, and it solves the long-lasting problem of bugs that has
>>> plagued the Ubuntu Startup Disk Creator (I think since 2011, Ubuntu
>>> 10.10 was still good).
>>>
>>> There are other things to consider:
>>>
>>> - this kind of boot drive is read-only [1]
>>>
>>> - it is more complicated to restore a standard storage drive [2,3]
>>>
>>> - there is no way to create a persistent live drive built into this
>>> Ubuntu Startup Disk Creator. (So users who want that must use other
>>> tools, for example [4].
>>>
>>> [1] https://help.ubuntu.com/community/mkusb
>>> [2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/usb-creator/+bug/1549603
>>> [3] https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2314875
>>> [4] https://help.ubuntu.com/community/mkusb#Persistent_live_systems
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Nio
>>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> Or are you suggesting to file a bug against gparted? Then I am with
>> you :-)
>>
>> Best regards
>> Nio
>
> Hi Ian and Alberto,
>
> *Done*
>
> I created the bug report #1622313, "gparted does not recognize the
> iso9660 file system in cloned Ubuntu USB boot drives"
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gparted/+bug/1622313
>
> I did it from Xenial daily 'looking at' its own iso file as cloned.
>
> Please mark 'affects me too', if it affects you. It would also be
> valuable to check in other versions of Ubuntu, particularly in Trusty
> alias 14.04.x LTS, because many people will install fresh Xenial systems
> from old Trusty systems.
>
> Best regards
> Nio

Hi again,

gparted in the amd64 alias 64-bit versions are worse than the i386 alias 
32-bit version, that I am running most of the time (because I have 
middle-aged and old computers).

After some more testing, I found that the amd64 versions are really 
acting up: in Xenial but even worse in Trusty.

See the attached screenshot in the bug report #1622313, comment #5 
(trusty) and comments #6-7 (xenial).

Best regards
Nio