Bug#1141839: installation-reports: preseed overwrites installer USB stick if no other drives are detected

On Thu, 2026-08-06 at 21:08 +0200, Holger Wansing wrote:
> Kevin Locke <[email protected]> wrote (Mon, 27 Jul 2026 11:31:46 -0600):
>> To summarize the options we've discussed and add a few of my own:
>> 
>> 1. Leave the issue unsolved for netboot.
>>    Pros:
>>    - Only affects netboot (more often used by power users)
>>    - No additional changes required.
>>    Cons:
>>    - Users may still inadvertently overwrite the installation media
>>      (interactively or preseed).
>> 2. Prompt to use install media when starting partman on netboot.
>>    Pros:
>>    - Nearly eliminates risk of overwriting installation media.
>>    - Relatively simple to implement.
>>    Cons:
>>    - Adds time/complexity/effort for all users.
>>    - Non-interactive preseeds must be updated for netboot, and
>>      requirements will differ between netboot and other media.
>> 3. Prompt to modify installation media at key points.
>>    If it's infeasible to ask for every action which might affect a
>>    disk, perhaps we could ask at key points?  For example,
>>    during/after "If you continue, the changes below will be written to
>>    the disks" and when installing the bootloader?
>>    Pros:
>>    - Reduces risk of overwriting installation media.
>>    - Only users at risk of overwriting must answer the question.
>>    Cons:
>>    - Implementation complexity.
>>    - May not cover all cases.
>> 4. Add a non-user-visible debconf prompt to allow overwriting
>>    installation media.  Default to allow.
>>    Pros:
>>    - Gives preseed authors a mechanism to use to prevent overwriting.
>>    - Relatively simple to implement.
>>    - No time/complexity/effort for most users.
>>    Cons:
>>    - Users may still inadvertently overwrite the installation media
>>      (interactively or preseed) in the default state.
>> 
>> Does that match your understanding as well?  If there are other
>> options, or other pros and cons worth considering, please chime in.
>> 
>> My preference would be 3 > 4 > 1 > 2, but I'll defer to your
>> expertise and implementation willingness.
> 
> I tend to option 1.
> The MR would be ready for this, and using this, we would at least have a
> solution for the most relevant use cases (leaving out power-user use-cases
> via netboot images).
> Waiting for the big solution, which deals with all use cases seems to 
> make us wait for a longer time (if not for ever), and will most likely
> not be implemented before Forky.
> 
> Objections?

None from me.  It's a pragmatic solution that I support.  Thanks again
for implementing it!

Cheers,
Kevin