[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Using xfsdump On Linux With IRIX Version 1 FS?

To: Christian Kujau <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Using xfsdump On Linux With IRIX Version 1 FS?
From: Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:22:58 +0200
Cc: Sean Elble <elbles@xxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.01.0907250241170.6426@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <C68F8010.B953%elbles@xxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.01.0907242048000.6426@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090725072617.GA30450@xxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.01.0907250241170.6426@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
On 25.07.2009 02:46, Christian Kujau wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 at 09:26, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
> > >   # losetup -r /dev/loop0 /path/to/IRIXbackup
> > >   # hexedit /dev/loop0 ...or whatever tool you'll be using.
> > 
> > Which has what advantage over directly changing the image?
> Sean mentioned the "thrashing of the old disk" and I figured I'd be 
> worried not only by that but that the old disk might die anytime soon. So 
> I wanted to present an alternative to do the search - I don't know too 
> much about his setup, so it's up to him to follow this advice or not.

I meant: What is the advantage of using the a loop-device (of the image) 
instead of directly using the image?

> > Even with just 10MB/s it's less than 4 Minutes for 2GB.
> > In comparison it takes over 3 hours to copy a modern 1TB HDD @ 80MB/s.
> ?? (what kind of comparison is that?)

That you can read/write whole "ancient" discs without having to wait for 

Bis denn

Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as 
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, 
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>