If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
[Default] On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 23:30:00 +0100, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Terry Pinnell writes: [] Thanks John. So is that a clear cut No to my opening question please? "So, does that include the external USB HD I described in my question please? IOW, can I do exactly what I asked?" I'm a bit confused what you're using this external USB HD for: storing the image, or storing the - bootable - imaging/cloning software. If not, what is the underlying reason? If the image was a bit-by-bit clone of my SSD C:, on an external USB WD HD, why could I not boot from that? Some confusion between "image" and "clone" here. Current usage seems to be: Cloning: a bit-by-bit copy of one disc to another. (In the extreme, if you clone a disc to a larger one, it will appear the same size as the original drive.) Usually, you can boot from a cloned drive, if you physically replace the original drive by the clone. That certainly was the usage but when I used Macrium Reflect to *clone* my HDD to a USB-dock-connected HDD, it made no comments about partition size. The partition was definitely bigger before I started and I didn't check afterwards, but I can't believe it made it smaller without telling me. (It's not connected now or I would check.) Micky Imaging: making a *file* that contains the _contents_ of one or more partitions (including hidden ones), from (I think) one or more drives. In effect, it's not dissimilar to a .ZIP file. There's no way you can boot from an image, even if you were to put the drive with the image file on it in place of the original source drive. You need to run the same software you used to create the image, to regenerate (unpack, unzip) the image back to the original partition(s) on a drive - either the original drive (e. g. if you've hosed your system, or had ransomware or other malware), or a new drive (e. g. if your original drive has died). Obviously, in order to be able to run this software, it has to be bootable, on something that your system's BIOS can boot from. (I prefer a mini-CD, as I know it's something fixed and unchangeable, but a USB stick is fine if your system can boot from USB, which most can.) So to _use_ an *image*, there are _three_ drives involved: 1. The - bootable - one with the (de-)imaging software on it; 2. the one where you put the image; 3. the one you're going to restore the image to. (I guess you could put the image onto the same one you have the bootable restore-image software on, but I wouldn't, for the risk of corrupting the restore-image software.) I've seen ambiguous answers on this, but it's obviously a key issue. I definitely do not want to physically replace my Samsung 950 Pro V-Nand M.2 PCl—e SSD 256GB, with its critical cabling to my Asus Z170 Pro 4 Motherboard. To grossly mis-quote Hancock, "It might seem easy to you, but it's life or death to some people!" In which case (I'm assuming the above is, or contains, your C: drive) the only way you can be _sure_ your image can be restored will be to put your heart in your mouth and restore it. Risking hosing your system (because restoring an image _will_ overwrite what's there). -- Terry, East Grinstead, UK |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
Micky wrote:
can 't you continue to update it as there are changes in the C drive, using vcopy or Karen's Replicator or xcopy or xxcopy? That won't take away its bootability, will it? Either you are a "wizard", or, you're some kind of "glutton for punishment" :-) The purpose of using automation methods, is so you can walk away and make dinner. Manually fiddling stuff like that, sounds like work. ******* Try to keep your downloaded DVD collection, separate from your C: . That will reduce the need to reproduce the data portion manually. Put your DVDs on D: and keep C: as mostly OS+Programs. Then, cloning or backup of C: is 20-30GB of files. After a DVD download is complete, taking care of moving that file immediately, putting it in the proper place, is a lot better than cleaning up the mess later. If you look at the Download folder contents later, it could have a DVD, it could have a grocery list text file, and then you have to sit there sorting them into piles and so on. It's much better to deal with files, at the instant of creation. If you're one of those people with a 900GB C: partition, and it's chock full of files, I can see your fixation with xxcopy or the like. Because you would not look forward to a one-click clone operation for such a thing. It would take too long. Most of my backup operations here, take 10-15 minutes. Because they involve a small C: . When I do a complete backup of this "typing" machine (all the VMs), that takes all day. And as a result, I don't do that very often. I think the biggest Linux VM, is around 30GB or so (in the form of a single file). And those files are all over the computer, there are unhooked ones (orphans) and so on. A mess :-) Paul |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
Bill in Co wrote:
You can use Windows Explorer to view the contents of an Acronis image backup (tib) file, and that even allows you to selectively copy files from the backup image to your drive, but I'm not sure if that's what you're asking. If you're asking for a viewer explicitly in Acronis (and not using windows explorer), I don't think so, but I might have missed it. Well, one of the backup programs, came with a "Viewer". I guess it was Ghost. http://superuser.com/questions/60293...on-ghost-v11-5 The others integrate better into Explorer, and mount stuff. Paul |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
[Default] On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 04:23:23 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Paul wrote: Micky wrote: can 't you continue to update it as there are changes in the C drive, using vcopy or Karen's Replicator or xcopy or xxcopy? That won't take away its bootability, will it? Either you are a "wizard", or, you're some kind of "glutton for punishment" :-) The purpose of using automation methods, is so you can walk away and make dinner. Manually fiddling stuff like that, sounds like work. Not to me. There's no reason any of those methods can't be set up in advance, put in a bat file if needed, put on the scheduler and run automatically. In fact I've already done that. Related to what you have written below: I've already gathered together almost all my data, except my Firefox profiles, and soon I'll include them and a couple other areas, so I'll have almost all files that change, so I can run the data backup quickly, either to a separate data backup partition or to the clone partition, or usually, both. So the question remains, is there any way that updating specific files in a clone will take away the clone's bootability? Isn't the bootability in the boot sector and one or two other areas that don't get changed during a file backup? Not in any file as such? Looking at it the other way, are there any files that should not be backed up, not because it's a waste of time like the swap file or the web cache but because they will mess up the bootability of the clone drive? Because if there are, two of my back-up choices above allow the user to make exceptions. And if the bootabilty is undamaged, how come I don't see this method suggested more often? P.S. And these data-only backups have the advantage that they don't require rebooting via a CD or external drive, and they still update the clone, so that later no restore is needed. If there is a problem, all one has to do is just use multi-boot to boot the other drive, or use a CD to change which physical drive is the boot/system drive, either of which leaves the original possibly malfunctioning drive as it was when it broke. This doesn't work for laptops but in a desktop if the clone is the second harddrive, it also allows for testing the clone without risking hosing the "C: drive". Doesn't it? Micky ******* Try to keep your downloaded DVD collection, separate from your C: . That will reduce the need to reproduce the data portion manually. Put your DVDs on D: and keep C: as mostly OS+Programs. Then, cloning or backup of C: is 20-30GB of files. After a DVD download is complete, taking care of moving that file immediately, putting it in the proper place, is a lot better than cleaning up the mess later. If you look at the Download folder contents later, it could have a DVD, it could have a grocery list text file, and then you have to sit there sorting them into piles and so on. It's much better to deal with files, at the instant of creation. If you're one of those people with a 900GB C: partition, and it's chock full of files, I can see your fixation with xxcopy or the like. Because you would not look forward to a one-click clone operation for such a thing. It would take too long. Most of my backup operations here, take 10-15 minutes. Because they involve a small C: . When I do a complete backup of this "typing" machine (all the VMs), that takes all day. And as a result, I don't do that very often. I think the biggest Linux VM, is around 30GB or so (in the form of a single file). And those files are all over the computer, there are unhooked ones (orphans) and so on. A mess :-) Paul |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
Micky wrote:
Not to me. There's no reason any of those methods can't be set up in advance, put in a bat file if needed, put on the scheduler and run automatically. In fact I've already done that. Related to what you have written below: I've already gathered together almost all my data, except my Firefox profiles, and soon I'll include them and a couple other areas, so I'll have almost all files that change, so I can run the data backup quickly, either to a separate data backup partition or to the clone partition, or usually, both. So the question remains, is there any way that updating specific files in a clone will take away the clone's bootability? Isn't the bootability in the boot sector and one or two other areas that don't get changed during a file backup? Not in any file as such? Looking at it the other way, are there any files that should not be backed up, not because it's a waste of time like the swap file or the web cache but because they will mess up the bootability of the clone drive? Because if there are, two of my back-up choices above allow the user to make exceptions. And if the bootabilty is undamaged, how come I don't see this method suggested more often? P.S. And these data-only backups have the advantage that they don't require rebooting via a CD or external drive, and they still update the clone, so that later no restore is needed. If there is a problem, all one has to do is just use multi-boot to boot the other drive, or use a CD to change which physical drive is the boot/system drive, either of which leaves the original possibly malfunctioning drive as it was when it broke. This doesn't work for laptops but in a desktop if the clone is the second harddrive, it also allows for testing the clone without risking hosing the "C: drive". Doesn't it? Micky C:\Windows has a bunch of stuff. C:\boot\BCD perhaps, on a modern OS. Maybe a few things like winload.exe or winload.efi. But for the most part, I think you already know where the OS portions are. You've got the Program Files folder. There's AppData. That stuff affects usability, but not booting. Maybe if you trash the user-specific profile files, that stops the desktop from appearing. (ntuser.*) But the basic boot stuff is far enough away from where you'd be normally working, you wouldn't be in danger of screwing it up. You can have permission issues. You can have file system objects that resist handling. Such as junction points that don't stand out like they should. And rather than "bootability" being an issue, it's an issue with making up the right sort of command line parameters to xxcopy. For example, Robocopy has a "don't go down Junction Points" command line argument, which is part of dealing with NTFS. It's rather like a golf course, filled with sand traps, trees, and gophers. It sounds like you're on the fairway right now, but you could easily go off into the woods. Paul |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
[Default] On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:54:12 -0400, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Paul wrote: Micky wrote: Not to me. There's no reason any of those methods can't be set up in advance, put in a bat file if needed, put on the scheduler and run automatically. In fact I've already done that. Related to what you have written below: I've already gathered together almost all my data, except my Firefox profiles, and soon I'll include them and a couple other areas, so I'll have almost all files that change, so I can run the data backup quickly, either to a separate data backup partition or to the clone partition, or usually, both. So the question remains, is there any way that updating specific files in a clone will take away the clone's bootability? Isn't the bootability in the boot sector and one or two other areas that don't get changed during a file backup? Not in any file as such? Looking at it the other way, are there any files that should not be backed up, not because it's a waste of time like the swap file or the web cache but because they will mess up the bootability of the clone drive? Because if there are, two of my back-up choices above allow the user to make exceptions. And if the bootabilty is undamaged, how come I don't see this method suggested more often? P.S. And these data-only backups have the advantage that they don't require rebooting via a CD or external drive, and they still update the clone, so that later no restore is needed. If there is a problem, all one has to do is just use multi-boot to boot the other drive, or use a CD to change which physical drive is the boot/system drive, either of which leaves the original possibly malfunctioning drive as it was when it broke. This doesn't work for laptops but in a desktop if the clone is the second harddrive, it also allows for testing the clone without risking hosing the "C: drive". Doesn't it? Micky C:\Windows has a bunch of stuff. C:\boot\BCD perhaps, on a modern OS. Maybe a few things like winload.exe or winload.efi. But for the most part, I think you already know where the OS portions are. You've got the Program Files folder. There's AppData. That stuff affects usability, but not booting. Maybe if you trash the user-specific profile files, that stops the desktop from appearing. (ntuser.*) But the basic boot stuff is far enough away from where you'd be normally working, you wouldn't be in danger of screwing it up. You can have permission issues. You can have file system objects that resist handling. Such as junction points that don't stand out like they should. And rather than "bootability" being an issue, it's an issue with making up the right sort of command line parameters to xxcopy. For example, Robocopy has a "don't go down Junction Points" command line argument, which is part of dealing with NTFS. It's rather like a golf course, filled with sand traps, trees, and gophers. It sounds like you're on the fairway right now, but you could easily go off into the woods. Paul Well, you raise some good points. I guess I won't know until I try it. I have to make a bracket to hold a second HDD in this box. I have one I won' tneed from an old PC but it's not quite right. I have to hurry because I'm running out of space on the current hdd. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
In message , Micky
writes: [] Can you eliminate one step if, instead of backing up the C drive, you clone it. Then there is no need to restore, only to fit the cloned drive in the place of the original drive. Yes. Though you clone it, including bootability in the first place, can 't you continue to update it as there are changes in the C drive, using vcopy or Karen's Replicator or xcopy or xxcopy? That won't take away its bootability, will it? I need clarification on what you mean by "update". From other posts, you seem to be using one drive for {OS and programs} and {data}. Clearly, I would be using compression, but hard drives are so big, that seems like no problem. If you use compression, you're not making a clone. [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Once you've started swinging, chimp-like, through the branches of your family tree, you might easily end up anywhere. - Alexander Armstrong, RT 2014/8/23-29 |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
In message , Micky
writes: [Default] On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:54:12 -0400, in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Paul wrote: [] Well, you raise some good points. I guess I won't know until I try it. I have to make a bracket to hold a second HDD in this box. I have one I won' tneed from an old PC but it's not quite right. I have to hurry because I'm running out of space on the current hdd. Why are you running out of space - OS/programs, or data? -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Once you've started swinging, chimp-like, through the branches of your family tree, you might easily end up anywhere. - Alexander Armstrong, RT 2014/8/23-29 |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
[Default] On Sat, 27 Aug 2016 09:26:34 +0100, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Micky writes: [] Can you eliminate one step if, instead of backing up the C drive, you clone it. Then there is no need to restore, only to fit the cloned drive in the place of the original drive. Yes. Though you clone it, including bootability in the first place, can 't you continue to update it as there are changes in the C drive, using vcopy or Karen's Replicator or xcopy or xxcopy? That won't take away its bootability, will it? I need clarification on what you mean by "update". From other posts, you seem to be using one drive for {OS and programs} and {data}. Yes. By update I meant when I download mail or newsgroups, or download downloadable files, I'd want to copy the latest files** to the clone, and just before switching drives, I'd want to copy over *every* file, file by file (not sector by sector), that has changed since the last time it was copied. So that it would be a clone again despite my having used the computer since the clone was first made. **I have another drive with a backup of just my data. Clearly, I would be using compression, but hard drives are so big, that seems like no problem. If you use compression, you're not making a clone. [] Darn, I meant would *not*. I think "not" is the word most often left out of writing. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
[Default] On Sat, 27 Aug 2016 09:27:42 +0100, in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote: In message , Micky writes: [Default] On Fri, 26 Aug 2016 12:54:12 -0400, in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general Paul wrote: [] Well, you raise some good points. I guess I won't know until I try it. I have to make a bracket to hold a second HDD in this box. I have one I won' tneed from an old PC but it's not quite right. I have to hurry because I'm running out of space on the current hdd. Why are you running out of space - OS/programs, or data? It's some of both for sure. Though for the last month or more, it's been creeping up because of data. I've kept away from new programs unless they're very small. The HDD is only 75GB which I think is plenty big for a work computer** because people shouldn't be installing much of their music and videos and their own chosen software. **(which this was meant to be. It's even called Vista Business, which means it didn't have media player etc.) |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Restoring a system image
In message , Micky
writes: [] I need clarification on what you mean by "update". From other posts, you seem to be using one drive for {OS and programs} and {data}. Yes. By update I meant when I download mail or newsgroups, or download downloadable files, I'd want to copy the latest files** to the clone, and just before switching drives, I'd want to copy over *every* file, file by file (not sector by sector), that has changed since the last time it was copied. So that it would be a clone again despite my having used the computer since the clone was first made. Modern OSs (at least back to XP) are sufficiently complex that I wouldn't try what you're describing. To me, the purpose of making an image or clone is so that I can restore my OS and all my software, all set up how I like it, in a form that will boot and work - which means the clone/image includes boot sectors, hidden partitions if any, and all the other things that just copying won't do. I _copy_ my _data_ more or less as you describe - by copying the actual files. (Well, I did initially, but now use SyncToy, which means I only copy the files - and delete from the backup - files which have been added/changed/deleted since last time, rather than copying every single data file. [Other similar timesaving tools are available.] In order to be able to do these two very different things, I keep my OS/software separate from my data - either on a physically separate HD, or at least on a separate partition. IMO, keeping data on the same disc - or at least partition - as your OS and software is Not A Good Idea. Not everyone agrees with me. (Certainly dividing the _data_ further into separate partitions, rather than just separate folders, I see no advantage in.) **I have another drive with a backup of just my data. Looks like you half agree then. I'd just say, why keep only the backup separate - why not separate it on the "live" copy too. Clearly, I would be using compression, but hard drives are so big, that seems like no problem. If you use compression, you're not making a clone. [] Darn, I meant would *not*. I think "not" is the word most often left out of writing. (-: Easily done. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Science fiction is escape into reality - Arthur C Clarke |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|