How to boot from an EUFI original or clone Linux partition

[brucebne]

TeraByte Support wrote:
> if it's mounted you must use the mount point.
>


I just repeated the backup of the unmounted OS partition (using IFL installed in MInt), and the generated image is still not visible in terminal or nemo.

I presume you mean the source partition must be unmounted.....and the target partition should be mounted, so IFL knows which folder to save the image to.

[brucebne]

ok, after a little more exploration, I discovered that images created by IFL (installed in Linux Mint)

- are not visible on the target partition.
- can be made visible by unmounting the target partition where they are created....then remounting.
- that rebooting the computer does not make these images visible. The remounting must be done within the OS.

[brucebne]

final word on operating IFL in linux.

I just did another image.
and got an input/output error when trying to read the target partition after remounting.

I ran chkdsk /f d: in windows and it seems many *.tbi files have not been processed correctly.


[attachment=1]Screenshot from 2019-02-10 19-44-48.png[/attachment]


[attachment=0]chdsk output.png[/attachment]

[Brian K]

Bruce, I've always created my IFL backups in an unmounted partition. I checked the partition in Win10 and chkdsk /f found no errors.

So I mounted the target partition and created several backups with IFL in Mint. I checked the partition in Win10 and chkdsk /f found no errors.

We keep getting different results. Hardware?

[brucebne]

Brian K wrote:
> Bruce, I've always created my IFL backups in an unmounted partition. I
> checked the partition in Win10 and chkdsk /f found no errors.
>
> So I mounted the target partition and created several backups with IFL in
> Mint. I checked the partition in Win10 and chkdsk /f found no errors.
>
> We keep getting different results. Hardware?

The Mint partitions I've imaged have definitely been unmounted.
The system partition images may have been mounted.
Anyway, the two screen shots above are unacceptable.

I've given up on IFL. I don't get the impression Linux users are a significant market for Terabyte.

Terabyte are saying the slow copy issue I have in BIU Partition Work. with the dell is due to BIOS...but the copy operation in IFU doesn't have the issue on the same laptop! hmmm

I still think Terabyte imaging and copy operations are the most reliable I've experienced.
I did a resize and slide operation in Gparted yesterday, and it took forever and messed the file table.
You see a lot of talk on the internet about boot manager and partition editor options, but the majority are obviously written by people who don't use them intensively.

[Brian K]

brucebne wrote:

>
> The Mint partitions I've imaged have definitely been unmounted.

I know you don't. I don't mount the target partition (the partition getting the *.tbi) either.

[Brian K]

Bruce, I'm an infrequent Linux user and I've learned a lot about Linux from your replies. Thank you. Now that you are dropping out of this thread I'll go back to using Linux infrequently. I prefer standalone IFL. I have an IFL partition on my SSD and boot it from the BIU boot menu.

I again checked my speeds in IFU. Copy and restore are fine but backup takes 8 times longer than IFL.

[brucebne]

Brian K wrote:
> brucebne wrote:
>
> >
> > The Mint partitions I've imaged have definitely been unmounted.
>
> I know you don't. I don't mount the target partition (the partition getting the
> *.tbi) either.

Yes I had thought target might need to be unmounted in addition to source, but hadn't tested that.
Which I just did now, and what do you know, the image is visible. problem solved.

However, it's interesting that Linux 'disks' program, e2image, and dd do not require the target to be unmounted.
And I don't recall Image for Windows locking off work on target, phylock locking down source only afaik.
And my target is my data partition, and many Linux users put data on a separate partition where /home resides.

I suppose having target unmounted is additional insurance that an image file can be written on contiguous blocks and be less prone to corruption.

Anyway, considering the potential to damage the file table, it would be a good idea to have IFL unmount target, or at least give a message that it needs to be done manually, rather than just let a dangerous process unfold.

[brucebne]

Brian K wrote:
> Bruce, I'm an infrequent Linux user and I've learned a lot about Linux from
> your replies. Thank you. Now that you are dropping out of this thread I'll
> go back to using Linux infrequently. I prefer standalone IFL. I have an IFL
> partition on my SSD and boot it from the BIU boot menu.
>
> I again checked my speeds in IFU. Copy and restore are fine but backup
> takes 8 times longer than IFL.

Thanks for your help Brian.
I'll revisit Terabyte's Linux offerings in 12 mths or so to see whether they are more suitable for a non IT professional.

[DrTeeth]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 12:44:08 PST, just as I was about to take a herb,
brucebne disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>I've given up on IFL. I don't get the impression Linux users are a significant market for Terabyte.

I have 8 Linux distros installed and have NEVER had any problems no
matter what I do with them. The difference here is that my drives are
MBR and will stay so.

I consider myself reasonably computer savvy, but did not have a clue
what you were going on about so I am puzzled by "I'll revisit
Terabyte's Linux offerings in 12 mths or so to see whether they are
more suitable for a non IT professional" in a later post. Your posts
were technically over my head so I believe that you are more than
capable to use the products in TBU's stable.

I have been using Terabyte products for YEARS and the products are
rock solid and the support stellar. Any problems, and there have been
precious few, have been down to carelessness, misplaced bravado, or
brain farts/senior moments on my part.

There is NOTHING on the market to compare with TBU products. The only
things I have not been happy about is the written style of the manuals
and a marketing decision TBU made - big deal...not!
--
Cheers,

DrT

** Amateurs built the Ark, but professionals built the Titanic.**