On 08/13/2013 04:27 PM, Brian K. White wrote:
On 8/8/2013 5:42 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Thursday, 2013-08-08 at 07:59 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
/snip/
But writing raw images to device nodes in an exact, reproducible, predictable manner is not an advertised function of cp. So if it worked, it was by happenstance. Even if it worked 500 times on every version of linux available right now, that is still happenstance. All those versions of linux still probably derive their version of cp from the same gnu base, with the only differences being age.
While dd is specifically made to do exactly that. It doesn't just happen to work for that also.
Probably the main difference behind the scenes is the assurance that dd will write one byte after another contiguously, no skipping around to use free blocks wherever they may be.
/snip/ I was recently advised to use rsync to do something like this. I tried it on a test--a portable drive--and it didn't work. Maybe I did it wrong, I don't know. What I want to do is to copy partitions (one at a time) to another drive with a different set of partitions, just a bit bigger. (And numbered differently, leaving out some that will not be used in the future. One reason is that the present drive partitioning scheme has unusable spaces where I cannot expand into them. I want to make a clean partitioning setup on another drive--actually an SSD, in the final cut. Will DD do that, or will it choke on having partitions of a different size, and different number? (IE., what is now sda8 may become sdb5, and so on, and then when that drive is mounted as the only drive, it will, I hope, be sda5.) --doug -- Blessed are the peacemakers..for they shall be shot at from both sides. --A.M.Greeley -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org