XPost: alt.os.linux.mint   
   From: Monsieur@notreal.invalid   
      
   Paul wrote:   
      
   > If you click a partition and use the Gear Wheel, you are offered a partition   
   image interface.   
   >   
   > But the way it is behaving, it looks to me   
   > like it might be "dd" instead of "partclone.ext4" or similar.   
   >   
   > Partclone would only back up the inodes with user data, and white space   
   would not   
   > be copied. Partclone is what Clonezilla might use.   
   >   
   > I use a Macrium Reflect USB stick ("rescue CD") for both backup and restore.   
      
   Yes, but then you have to have Windows on your pc, which I don't have.   
   Also I don't trust Windows programs to handle EXT partitions.   
      
   A few weeks ago, I tried to run Hiren's Boot cd just because I had read   
   some good things about it. It's a live Windows session, and Windows   
   typically wants to put its mark on every disk it finds in a system at   
   least once. You know when you insert a brand new usb-stick Windows   
   always says "Oh no, there may be something wrong with this brand new   
   disk, please let me scan it!", followed by "Scan complete. No errors   
   found". Or something like that.   
      
   Anyway, long story short, when I booted back into Linux, my LUKS   
   encrypted partition was no longer accessible. Rebooted a few times, but   
   still got a serious error (I forgot which) when I tried to access the   
   partition. Fortunately a cryptsetup repair command fixed the problem.   
   Never again will I let Windows or a Windows program touch a disk with   
   EXT partitions on, encrypted or not.   
      
      
      
   > It makes compact copies of FAT32 and NTFS (does not record white space unless   
   > you ask it to), but it also makes compact copies of EXT partitions. They're   
   > probably not quite as efficient as partclone. If you had 20GB of data on a   
   > 1TB partition, Reflect makes a 30GB backup out of that, partclone would be   
   > closer to 20GB in size. And then your choice of compression utility, can   
   > make the thing smaller when you put it on your backup drive. While Macrium   
   > has a built-in compressor, it's a lightweight one (gzip 3 or maybe a lighter   
   > weight one than that), and I have better compressors for reducing backup   
   size.   
   >   
   > If Gnome-disks did a partition image of a 1TB partition, it would be 1TB in   
   > size. This is inefficient, and slow. There are ways to improve the situation   
   ("zerofree"),   
   > but those aren't suited to SSD drives. Even dd isn't a clever choice for   
   SSDs,   
   > it's better suited to rotating hard drives (where writes don't cost you   
   anything).   
   > SSDs have limited write life. dd does large writes, not good for an SSD   
   drive.   
      
   Interesting, I did not know that. I better start backing up my backups   
   then, because all my disks are cheap ssd's.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)