> > > > Le dimanche 25 octobre 2009 05:14:14, James Harper a écrit : > > > A year or two ago I was pondering about the best way to restore a > > > Windows system to 'bare metal'. BartPE is kind of nice for XP and 2003, > > > but is fairly specific on what platforms it supports, is legally > > > questionable if you are using OEM licenses, and in order to restore an > > > XP system you need access to files from Windows 2003 etc. I then looked > > > at what would be involved in booting Linux (via CD/USB/netboot/etc) and > > > then restoring that way. At the time though, the ACL's, ownership, and a > > > whole load of other stuff would be missing so there didn't seem to be > > > much point pursuing it. > > > > > > The latest 'Advanced' release of ntfs-3g supports direct access to the > > > ACL's, ADS's, NTFS Attributes, DOS filenames (eg the 8.3 filename > > > equivalent of the Windows filename), datestamps, and possibly EFS too. > > > So in theory, it would be possible to extend processWin32BackupAPIBlock > > > to not only write out the regular file data, but also to write out the > > > ACL's, ADS's, etc etc. I don't even think it would be that much work... > > > although I've been famously wrong about such things before :) > > > > Would be nice, but it's a terribly difficult reverse engineering process.... > > I'm suddenly a lot less enthusiastic about this approach. ntfs-3g is flatly > refusing to let me apply some ACL's and it isn't obvious why. I think that > ntfs-3g is being overly enthusiastic about checking what constitutes a valid > ACL before applying it. I believe it's a bug, and am also concerned that maybe > this is the tip of the iceberg of such bugs. On the other hand it may well be > the only bug I ever encounter... >
According to one of the ntfs-3g developers, it is just an overzealous check. I also implemented the setting of OBJECT_ID's into ntfs-3g. It doesn't update the ntfs index so a chkdsk is required afterwards, but the developer is looking at implementing properly. One thing the BackupRead stream has in it is details about sparse files, specifically the sparse areas. A Windows system that was 5.92G when backed up is suddenly 7.60G when restored, presumably the lack of Bacula's understanding of BackupRead sparse streams is the cause of this. James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
