Thanks for the tips. Maybe you can help with this newbie question... I have a Thinkpad, dual boot W2k & Linux. I bought a second hard disk, identical to the one that came with the laptop, and a carrier for the Ultrabay.
My backup is: dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/hdc This works great, but I expect it's copying my (you guessed it) reiserfs partitions verbatim. So I imagine if I wanted to reformat with different partition types, to restore I'd go in on an hdaX level, like hda5 = hdc5, but I can't do a byte for byte copy if I want to end up with a different fs type. What command would work, please? I figured I might need to answer this question some day, but maybe sooner is better. Thanks in advance, Bret Daniel Pittman wrote: > > On Wed, 05 Dec 2001, Bret Waldow wrote: > >>Alexander Clouter wrote: >> >> >>> As for the XFS.....GOOD MAN :) None of that 'girly-man' reiserfs >>> crud :) >>>I'm running it too and everything is just peachy :) >>> >>Ok, I'll bite. What's bad about reiser, or what's good about xfs? >> >>Seriously, if there's something serious there - inquiring minds and >>all that... >> > > Well, personally I use ext3, and I wouldn't let ReiserFS near anything > that I cared about. Heck, I even look suspiciously at the sources... ;) > > Seriously, though, I really wouldn't advise ReiserFS to anyone, at least > not for a year or two. The reasons are: > > 1) static fsck tool /very/ poor[1] > 2) bi-monthly "ReiserFS ate my filesystem" posts on linux-kernel > 3) semi-regular "ReiserFS needs this patch to not die in situation X" > posts on same. > 4) "Just run reiserfsck --rebuild-tree to make sure it keeps working..." > 5) Performances falls on the floor one the FS is > 90% full, on average. > 6) Only journals meta-data. > > It's got some *great* ideas in it, and it's really well supported by the > people who are developing it. I have a great deal of respect for them, > don't get me wrong. > > I just think that they made a mistake building fsck second and I > (personally, and I am paranoid) like journaled data. > > > The stability of it has never been sufficient for me. It seems to be an > endless treadmill of fix after fix after fix, each removing an > occasional data corruption bug. > > Heck, tail packing spend over a year where they had corruption of files > regularly. It /looks/ stable now, a year later, because no one has > reported a bug in the area for a few months -- but do you believe that? > > Daniel > > Footnotes: > [1] Every single time I looked at it. I have not done so for, like, > three months. If it's great now, someone correct me, please. :) > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
