Jacques B. wrote:
I will not expect you to use those rules. I wrote them for myself and thought others might be interested. I have shown I know what is perfect. I didn't do it in a perfect way. But the copy booted up and works fine. So most of the copy is good.It didn't seem to make any problem. I was getting emails and sending them. They were all working normal on this computer and the destination copy runs just great. Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DIKarl, the danger is not with the source so much as it is with the destination (i.e. copy). At source dd is just reading. Any changes happening at source are happening through normal operating system behaviour. To the source dd is simply another process running, reading data off its drive. The issue is at destination. Granted the important files (system binaries, config files) likely will not change while simply surfing the net and checking emails. What will change are temporary Internet files, browser config files if you happen to save a password or respond to some other such browser popup, email INBOX and other such files if you are using a POP email client, and other such potential changes. So yes, the system will likely appear to run fine as the important system files will likely have been copied over properly given they will not have changed during the process. But allocated space and free space pointers will change throughout therefore corrupting the file system. That will eventually manifest itself in problems that may appear to make no sense. And of course numerous files will have been created and/or deleted during the process causing potential problems (think photocopying of book analogy). The other caveat you do not mention is that this would not necessarily work well if you were putting the copy into a different system (different hardware - different drivers required, different configuration required). The read between the lines point made by Matthew as I saw it is that you cannot simply put together a "do this, this and this because I said so" tutorial for such a potentially destructive process which requires certain required knowledge to be able to do properly given you brief instructions. Not to mention your advice is flawed in many ways as has already been pointed out. I'm hanging up my keyboard on this topic after this post. Far too many experienced/knowledgeable people have put far too much effort trying to explain something to you that you consistently choose to ignore. Nobody is asking you to get up and say "I am wrong." It's not a matter of wrong or right. It's a matter of saying, "I learned something I didn't know. Now I know better." Nobody is asking you to abandon your convictions. Just don't be so stubborn in them when it is clear that they are misplaced. Jacques B.
-- Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI Linux User #450462 http://counter.li.org.
