1 |
Am Samstag 09 Juni 2007 02:25 schrieb Albert Hopkins: |
2 |
> On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 19:01 -0500, jamesc@××××××××××××.com wrote: |
3 |
> > On Fri Jun 8 16:38 , Dale <dalek@××××××××××.net> sent: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > Yeah, that's me, I do exactly the same until you issue the cp command |
7 |
> > where I do: $>cd /mnt/oldstuff && tar cvjpf /pathtosomewhere/mystuff.tbz |
8 |
> > ./ |
9 |
> > and then extract to the new directory. I do this out of habit mostly |
10 |
> > and, yes, it is a useless step unless you want to store a copy somewhere |
11 |
> > for whatever reason... |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > --James |
14 |
> |
15 |
> The one thing I mentioned is that I actually pipe tar to tar (tar -c ... |
16 |
> |
17 |
> | tar -x ...) which seems even more useless, but as I said I'm used to |
18 |
> |
19 |
> doing some things out of habit. Then I thought about why: the '-a' flag |
20 |
> is not available on all *nices... I believe it's a GNU extension. So I |
21 |
> probably got used to using the tar trick on a non-GNU system and got |
22 |
> used to it because it works whether I'm using Linux or not. But if |
23 |
> you're on a Linux system (that has rsync installed) then rsync is |
24 |
> probably the nicer option. It's got even more options than GNU's cp. I |
25 |
> actually 'alias cp="rsync"' on my Gentoo systems. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> 'dd' is good if you want to preserve filesystem/geometry but not good if |
28 |
> you don't. |
29 |
> -- |
30 |
> Albert W. Hopkins |
31 |
|
32 |
I wouldn't recommend dd, either. Using dd you would preserve all the |
33 |
fragmentation of the old file system while cp, tar and rsync don't. |