| 1 |
Crayon Shin Chan <crayon.shin.chan.uk@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Sunday 02 March 2008, davecode@××××××××××.net wrote: |
| 4 |
>> "What supports what" is a good reason for non-filesystem backups. For |
| 5 |
>> example partimage has trouble with XFS (still...after all these |
| 6 |
>> years...). A program like dd doesn't care the fs. Call it a device |
| 7 |
>> backup if you like. This is your basic choice in backup - device or |
| 8 |
>> fs. Me personally, dd_rescue - far better than raw dd. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> The advantage of something like partimage, which knows about the |
| 11 |
> filesystem being backed up, is that it can back up only the used portions |
| 12 |
> of the fs. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Yes, it can. But you achieve the same (only used stuff is backed up) |
| 15 |
with a simpler tool like "tar" as well. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> So eg if you're backing up a 20GB partition of which only 1GB |
| 18 |
> is in use, then using partimage it will be very quick and the resulting |
| 19 |
> image very small. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Then the tar file will also be just 1GB. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I really don't see the benefit in using things like partimage or |
| 24 |
Ghost. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Michael |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives