On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 16:53 +0300, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > On 3/12/06, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > It is, with a few 'buts'. Firstly, the source should be mounted > > > > but may not - unless system is generally idle. fsck will be checking the > > copy then, but with success. > > No matter what fsck says later, it's too dangerous. A FreeBSD > system (as well as any other complicated OS) is never really > idle in terms of disk I/O. > > > On 3/12/06, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > list sometime in the last 3-5 weeks. Giorgios Keramidas > > > commented that "dd" was too slow for his tastes and > > > > dd is the fastest, but probably he used small block size. 64K is OK > > dd can be slower than dump/restore in quite a few cases, > especially when disk is far from full. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
I have done this 'safely', by booting Knoppix, and using dd to copy the disk in the knowledge that all the UFS filesystems are closed and clean. Use a large blocksize; you can go a lot bigger than 64K. -- Mike Jeays http://ca.geocities.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
