| 1 |
Tuesday, May 19, 2009, 9:28:44 PM, Jarry wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On Tue, 19 May 2009 19:50:59 +0200, Jarry wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> Nothing. But this is what I expect from such a software: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> 1. backup of partition in use (sync disk, snapshot of partition) |
| 9 |
>>> 2. "smart" copying (only sectors with data) |
| 10 |
>>> 3. automatic partition recovery (including partition-table) |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Then use LVM and tar. Otherwise, trying to backup an in-use partition |
| 13 |
>> can result in inconsistencies. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> I'm using O&O DiskImage with WinXP, and never had any inconsistency |
| 16 |
> while doing backup of "live" partition. I'd like to have the same |
| 17 |
> possibility with linux. But maybe I simply expect too much... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Concerning LVM: IIRC it is not recommended to use lvm for /boot or |
| 20 |
> / partition (maybe this has changed since I tested lvm last time). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> And finally, tar is file-based backup/recovery tool. It does not |
| 23 |
> take care of partition table (sizes, flags, names, etc) nor for |
| 24 |
> boot loader. And it is less comfortable, you must exclude some |
| 25 |
> directories (/proc, /dev). What I need is a tool which can quickly |
| 26 |
> and easily backup/restore the whole disk. Fully automatic action |
| 27 |
> is highly prefered. I think partition-based backup/cloning software |
| 28 |
> is better suited for this... |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
snapshots + rsync? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> Jarry |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Sergey |
Archives