Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is >>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
expensive.
After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is >>>>> available for it too, mind you.
I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's
right for me.
MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount
of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
dilemma.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is >>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
expensive.
After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is >>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's >>>>> right for me.
MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates.
As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount >>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no
matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it
already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
dilemma.
I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
https://cultnix.org/
(_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
epistles? ;) )
ObWindows:
Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
vallor wrote:what they do.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is >>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
expensive.
After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is >>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's >>>>>> right for me.
MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. >>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount >>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no >>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it >>>> already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
dilemma.
I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
https://cultnix.org/
(_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
epistles? ;) )
ObWindows:
Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month, updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with everything, even if it's working perfectly. It's just
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software, written by people that are experts and specialize in that. I use macrium reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and most have a free version. Backup software istoo important to trust microsoft.
You might have to enable SMB V1 protocoltroubleshoot/detect-enable-and-disable-smbv1-v2-v3?tabs=server
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-server/storage/file-server/
vallor wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 17:52:05 -0600, Hank Rogers <Hank@nospam.invalid>
wrote in <vm48v6$23a1f$2@dont-email.me>:
Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:Indeed, linux is the only way to salvation.
On 2025-01-13 17:54, Joel wrote:
CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
On 2025-01-13 16:32, Joel wrote:
MikeS <MikeS@fred.com> wrote:
On 12/01/2025 23:23, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
So which OS do you choose to expend your valuable time on?
Windows is a great OS -- if your time is worth nothing.
Linux is the only option worth pursuing. macOS is weird and
expensive, Windows is bloatware beyond belief.
There's not much to pursue in MacOS. It works as it should and it is >>>>>>> a fairly pleasant experience. However, I would agree that it's
expensive.
After a while, you'll need tools to do additional things and on
MacOS, you're going to be paying money in most cases. Open-source is >>>>>>> available for it too, mind you.
I just dislike Windows and macOS, it might be my own opinion but it's >>>>>> right for me.
MacOS machines have a shelf life of about seven years before Apple
decides that your machine is no longer worth supporting with updates. >>>>> As we've seen, Windows machines get about seven, so it's a fair amount >>>>> of time. However, Linux has them both beat with unlimited support no >>>>> matter how pathetic the machine you're running it on is.
My machine is an interesting example - if I'd stayed with Win10, it'd
be slammin', but then support would end relatively early in its life.
So upgrade to 11, great, until the bloat overtakes it, as in my view it >>>> already began to with 23H2. Linux is the only way to solve this
dilemma.
I'm glad you see the light, Brother Hank!
https://cultnix.org/
(_Cult of Unix_ home page -- there's nothing there but
a title with an animated gif, perhaps I should add some
epistles? ;) )
ObWindows:
Just navigated the backup mess in Windows 11 --
I said the hell with windows backup long long ago. Even if it works
perfectly What are the chances they'll change it? And once a month,
updates can easily dork it. Microsoft constantly fiddles with
everything, even if it's working perfectly. It's just what they do.
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software,
written by people that are experts and specialize in that. I use
macrium reflect, but there are several others just as good or better and
most have a free version. Backup software is too important to trust microsoft.
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Linux systems, rsync works well. It?s essentially a bulk file-copying utility. That?s all you need to backup/restore Linux systems.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Linux systems, rsync works well. It’s essentially a bulk file-copying utility. That’s all you need to backup/restore Linux systems.
On Thu, 1/16/2025 12:03 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:With Macrium, I can back up FAT32, NTFS, ExFAT, and ... EXT4. This means
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Linux systems, rsync works well. It’s essentially a bulk
file-copying utility. That’s all you need to backup/restore Linux
systems.
when I image a dual-boot disk drive here, it is a *complete* image. I
can restore it to a brand new hard drive,
and it boots as if nothing had happened.
As long as my Linux installs use EXT4 for slash, I'm fine and one
imaging tool does everything for me.
The imaging is "smart". in that busy clusters and busy inodes are backed
up, not white space. If I have 20GB of files on a 1TB EXT4, the backup
image is a bit bigger than 20GB but not by much. Similarly, if I back up
20GB of files on a 1TB NTFS, the output is not much bigger than 20GB.
And the NTFS and EXT4 can sit in the same MRIMG file,
there is no segregation involved and separate files for them. It's all
in a single file.
Macrium even backs up the 16MB Microsoft Reserved, which has no file
system. It does that using the equivalent of "dd", but it does not throw
a wobbly and complain about what it has been asked to do. It puts that
back on a restore.
Details and automation, are the key to push-button success.
Paul
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:34:01 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in <vmb8t8$3id01$1@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 1/16/2025 12:03 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:With Macrium, I can back up FAT32, NTFS, ExFAT, and ... EXT4. This means
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Linux systems, rsync works well. It’s essentially a bulk
file-copying utility. That’s all you need to backup/restore Linux
systems.
when I image a dual-boot disk drive here, it is a *complete* image. I
can restore it to a brand new hard drive,
and it boots as if nothing had happened.
As long as my Linux installs use EXT4 for slash, I'm fine and one
imaging tool does everything for me.
The imaging is "smart". in that busy clusters and busy inodes are backed
up, not white space. If I have 20GB of files on a 1TB EXT4, the backup
image is a bit bigger than 20GB but not by much. Similarly, if I back up
20GB of files on a 1TB NTFS, the output is not much bigger than 20GB.
And the NTFS and EXT4 can sit in the same MRIMG file,
there is no segregation involved and separate files for them. It's all
in a single file.
Macrium even backs up the 16MB Microsoft Reserved, which has no file
system. It does that using the equivalent of "dd", but it does not throw
a wobbly and complain about what it has been asked to do. It puts that
back on a restore.
Details and automation, are the key to push-button success.
Paul
I'm sure Macrium Reflect is a fine bit of software, but I wonder
about the wisdom of imaging a mounted partition. I think the only
way to do that safely would be to boot to a USB stick -- that way,
you aren't trying to image mounted filesystems.
File-copying software like rsync is quite sufficient for doing “bare-metal restores” on Linux.
On 2025-01-16 22:37, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
File-copying software like rsync is quite sufficient for doing “bare-metal >> restores” on Linux.
Not for restoring grub.
vallor wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 10:34:01 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote in
<vmb8t8$3id01$1@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 1/16/2025 12:03 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:With Macrium, I can back up FAT32, NTFS, ExFAT, and ... EXT4. This means >>> when I image a dual-boot disk drive here, it is a *complete* image. I
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ... >>>>On Linux systems, rsync works well. It’s essentially a bulk
file-copying utility. That’s all you need to backup/restore Linux >>>> systems.
can restore it to a brand new hard drive,
and it boots as if nothing had happened.
As long as my Linux installs use EXT4 for slash, I'm fine and one
imaging tool does everything for me.
The imaging is "smart". in that busy clusters and busy inodes are backed >>> up, not white space. If I have 20GB of files on a 1TB EXT4, the backup
image is a bit bigger than 20GB but not by much. Similarly, if I back up >>> 20GB of files on a 1TB NTFS, the output is not much bigger than 20GB.
And the NTFS and EXT4 can sit in the same MRIMG file,
there is no segregation involved and separate files for them. It's all
in a single file.
Macrium even backs up the 16MB Microsoft Reserved, which has no file
system. It does that using the equivalent of "dd", but it does not throw >>> a wobbly and complain about what it has been asked to do. It puts that
back on a restore.
Details and automation, are the key to push-button success.
Paul
I'm sure Macrium Reflect is a fine bit of software, but I wonder
about the wisdom of imaging a mounted partition. I think the only
way to do that safely would be to boot to a USB stick -- that way,
you aren't trying to image mounted filesystems.
It works just fine on a running windows system. It uses Volume shadow service. I'm pretty sure most other backup software can also work while windows is running.
On 2025-01-16 22:37, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
File-copying software like rsync is quite sufficient for doing
“bare-metal restores” on Linux.
Not for restoring grub.
On Thu, 1/16/2025 12:03 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 20:05:34 -0600, Hank Rogers wrote:With Macrium, I can back up FAT32, NTFS, ExFAT, and ... EXT4.
I think people are better off to get some type of imaging software ...
On Linux systems, rsync works well. It’s essentially a bulk
file-copying utility. That’s all you need to backup/restore Linux
systems.
A complete solution, these are some of the things it does.
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 22:48:10 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 2025-01-16 22:37, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
File-copying software like rsync is quite sufficient for doing
“bare-metal restores” on Linux.
Not for restoring grub.
After the bulk file copy (with rsync or other tool), you need to fix up
two things:
1) /etc/fstab with the new volume UUIDs
2) reinstall grub
That’s it. I have successfully migrated bootable systems many times using this procedure.
On 2025-01-17 01:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
After the bulk file copy (with rsync or other tool), you need to fix up
two things:
1) /etc/fstab with the new volume UUIDs
No. I want the old UUIDs and labels.
2) reinstall grub
I don't want to.
And you forget rebuilding initrd, which holds a copy of fstab.
And you forget that there are encrypted partitions.
You can freeze a copy of C: for example, and run a Robocopy over it.
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:06:00 -0500, Paul wrote:
You can freeze a copy of C: for example, and run a Robocopy over it.
Until you hit the limitations of Windows and Robocopy, and have to give
up on it and use Linux instead.
<https://www.theregister.com/2010/09/24/sysadmin_file_tools/>
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:49:17 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <vmcgfd$3osq8$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:06:00 -0500, Paul wrote:
You can freeze a copy of C: for example, and run a Robocopy over it.
Until you hit the limitations of Windows and Robocopy, and have to give
up on it and use Linux instead.
<https://www.theregister.com/2010/09/24/sysadmin_file_tools/>
I suspect things may have changed in the last *14 years*.
File-copying software like rsync is quite sufficient for doing ?bare-metal restores? on Linux.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:49:17 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <vmcgfd$3osq8$2@dont-email.me>:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 18:06:00 -0500, Paul wrote:
You can freeze a copy of C: for example, and run a Robocopy over it.
Until you hit the limitations of Windows and Robocopy, and have to give
up on it and use Linux instead.
<https://www.theregister.com/2010/09/24/sysadmin_file_tools/>
I suspect things may have changed in the last *14 years*.
That's *not* how you transfer sixty million files.
The right tool turned out to be: “use Linux”.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 02:10:16 -0500, Paul wrote:
That's *not* how you transfer sixty million files.
And yet it worked, as per the original article. Being a file-level copy,
it could move the files between entirely different filesystem formats and volume sizes. And do so efficiently.
Windows seems to force you into thinking in terms of sector-level copies
and low-level “imaging” and like that. Filesystems are supposed to abstract away from all that. They do on Linux, but it seems Windows hasn’t quite caught up to that idea yet.
On Fri, 1/17/2025 6:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
Windows seems to force you into thinking in terms of sector-levelNo, you just gotta use your brain. That is all.
copies and low-level “imaging” and like that. Filesystems are supposed >> to abstract away from all that. They do on Linux, but it seems Windows
hasn’t quite caught up to that idea yet.
Who in their right mind, picks the least efficient way to do something ?
On Fri, 1/17/2025 6:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
The right tool turned out to be: “use Linux”.The right tool turned out to be: "use a computer"
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 508 |
Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
Uptime: | 242:30:33 |
Calls: | 9,986 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 13,836 |
Messages: | 6,358,644 |