Thread: [Clonezilla-live] Why clonezilla sucks
A partition and disk imaging/cloning program
Brought to you by:
steven_shiau
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-01 15:55:54
|
Hello I tried to use clonezilla. While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically at putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs - the docs (only a reference card) are in *downloads* section, there is no docs section at all - the FAQ has very little information on actually using the thing, only on resolving issues provided you are already using the thing - the scripts that are used to run the actual imaging use some tlas for a dozen of options interspersed with filenames spanning half the terminal line 2) the user-available options are lacking - I don't want to answer every time that it should use en_US.UTF-8 locale, no keyboard layout, and such junk. I can understand that this is important for people with odd locales but make it one choice at least, not three - gparted is not included which is according to some stfw results the only way to actually get the target drive partitioned sanely - there is no way to specify target partition sizes (except by restoring partitions one by one to a pre-partitioned drive) although the script can supposedly clone smaller disk to lager one resizing partitions proportionally so it must have partition resizing functionality included 3) the source is junk - there is only a makefile that copies some stuff to your system as far as I can read makefiles but does not build anything - there is no doc saying what you need to build and how to build - there is no index saying which file does what in the script directory with tens of cryptic scripts in there - there is no VCS. I can't believe the author does not use one. Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if I wanted to clone a disk using free software. I guess I will have better luck adding them to my own d-l images than trying to figure out how clonezilla is supposed to be used, though. Regards Michal |
From: Art A. <art@RHD.ORG> - 2010-12-01 16:33:33
|
Hi Michal, Let me clue you in on how free, open source software works. It is put together, usually and mostly by volunteers who don't get paid for their time. It is often produced to serve a particular need of the developer, who then graciously shares it with the public. It costs you nothing. Most importantly, nobody forces you to use it. If you don't like it, or it doesn't suit your needs, just don't use it. Constructive comments, suggestions, and source contributions are generally appreciated, ad hominum attacks are just rude. -- Art Alexion Systems Engineer -- Infrastructure Engineering Group Resources for Human Development >>---> -----Original Message----- >>---> From: Michal Suchanek [mailto:hra...@ce...] >>---> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:55 AM >>---> To: Clo...@li... >>---> Subject: [Clonezilla-live] Why clonezilla sucks >>---> >>---> Hello >>---> >>---> I tried to use clonezilla. >>---> >>---> While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically at >>---> putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. >>---> >>---> 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs >>---> >>---> - the docs (only a reference card) are in *downloads* section, there is >>---> no docs section at all >>---> - the FAQ has very little information on actually using the thing, only on >>---> resolving issues provided you are already using the thing >>---> - the scripts that are used to run the actual imaging use some tlas for a >>---> dozen of options interspersed with filenames spanning half the >>---> terminal line >>---> >>---> 2) the user-available options are lacking >>---> >>---> - I don't want to answer every time that it should use en_US.UTF-8 >>---> locale, no keyboard layout, and such junk. I can understand that this is >>---> important for people with odd locales but make it one choice at least, >>---> not three >>---> - gparted is not included which is according to some stfw results the >>---> only way to actually get the target drive partitioned sanely >>---> - there is no way to specify target partition sizes (except by restoring >>---> partitions one by one to a pre-partitioned drive) although the script can >>---> supposedly clone smaller disk to lager one resizing partitions >>---> proportionally so it must have partition resizing functionality included >>---> >>---> 3) the source is junk >>---> >>---> - there is only a makefile that copies some stuff to your system as far as >>---> I can read makefiles but does not build anything >>---> - there is no doc saying what you need to build and how to build >>---> - there is no index saying which file does what in the script directory >>---> with tens of cryptic scripts in there >>---> - there is no VCS. I can't believe the author does not use one. >>---> >>---> Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if I >>---> wanted to clone a disk using free software. >>---> >>---> I guess I will have better luck adding them to my own d-l images than >>---> trying to figure out how clonezilla is supposed to be used, though. >>---> >>---> Regards >>---> >>---> Michal >>---> >>---> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>---> Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500! >>---> Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by >>---> optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the >>---> Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for >>---> grabs. >>---> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev >>---> _______________________________________________ >>---> Clonezilla-live mailing list >>---> Clo...@li... >>---> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clonezilla-live |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-01 16:49:44
|
On 1 December 2010 17:10, Roger Truss <Rog...@me...> wrote: > > Sorry you dislike it so much. We have been using it for a couple years now and I was able to customize the version we have so techs really only need to enter in an image name, userid and password to access the host storage server. > > I have tried to do the same with newer versions with little success. > > The version we are using is. clonezilla-live-1.1.0-8 The only reason is because of its ability to be modified within the Microsoft environment. It took me days to figure it out but now it works great. > > In fact here is the document I made so I could duplicate the process when new versions came out. Unfortunately the newer versions were so different that the doc was useless, so I said , the version we have is just fine. Apparently we both want a usable tool which the current clonezilla is not. On 1 December 2010 17:18, Art Alexion <ar...@rh...> wrote: > Hi Michal, > > Let me clue you in on how free, open source software works. > > It is put together, usually and mostly by volunteers who don't get paid for their time. It is often produced to serve a particular need of the developer, who then graciously shares it with the public. Indeed, and I thank the author for showing that writing such software is possible and what tools are required. That the resulting software is of no use to me does not change this. > It costs you nothing. This is a myth. It costs you learning how to use the software (which can be comparable to rewriting if the software in question is poorly documented), implementing the missing features, and maintaining them if upstream does not accept them. > > Most importantly, nobody forces you to use it. If you don't like it, or it doesn't suit your needs, just don't use it. I'm not going to, thank you very much. > > Constructive comments, suggestions, and source contributions are generally appreciated, ad hominum attacks are just rude. In the name of constructive criticism and source contributions I downloaded the source, looked at it, registered for this list and posted about things I dislike about the software. Could you, please, cite where I used an ad-hominum attack? Perhaps I need to improve my understanding of English, I am not a native speaker. Regards Michal > > -- > Art Alexion > Systems Engineer -- Infrastructure Engineering Group > Resources for Human Development > > > >>>---> -----Original Message----- >>>---> From: Michal Suchanek [mailto:hra...@ce...] >>>---> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:55 AM >>>---> To: Clo...@li... >>>---> Subject: [Clonezilla-live] Why clonezilla sucks >>>---> >>>---> Hello >>>---> >>>---> I tried to use clonezilla. >>>---> >>>---> While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically at >>>---> putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. >>>---> >>>---> 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs >>>---> >>>---> - the docs (only a reference card) are in *downloads* section, there is >>>---> no docs section at all >>>---> - the FAQ has very little information on actually using the thing, only on >>>---> resolving issues provided you are already using the thing >>>---> - the scripts that are used to run the actual imaging use some tlas for a >>>---> dozen of options interspersed with filenames spanning half the >>>---> terminal line >>>---> >>>---> 2) the user-available options are lacking >>>---> >>>---> - I don't want to answer every time that it should use en_US.UTF-8 >>>---> locale, no keyboard layout, and such junk. I can understand that this is >>>---> important for people with odd locales but make it one choice at least, >>>---> not three >>>---> - gparted is not included which is according to some stfw results the >>>---> only way to actually get the target drive partitioned sanely >>>---> - there is no way to specify target partition sizes (except by restoring >>>---> partitions one by one to a pre-partitioned drive) although the script can >>>---> supposedly clone smaller disk to lager one resizing partitions >>>---> proportionally so it must have partition resizing functionality included >>>---> >>>---> 3) the source is junk >>>---> >>>---> - there is only a makefile that copies some stuff to your system as far as >>>---> I can read makefiles but does not build anything >>>---> - there is no doc saying what you need to build and how to build >>>---> - there is no index saying which file does what in the script directory >>>---> with tens of cryptic scripts in there >>>---> - there is no VCS. I can't believe the author does not use one. >>>---> >>>---> Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if I >>>---> wanted to clone a disk using free software. >>>---> >>>---> I guess I will have better luck adding them to my own d-l images than >>>---> trying to figure out how clonezilla is supposed to be used, though. >>>---> >>>---> Regards >>>---> >>>---> Michal >>>---> >>>---> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>---> Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500! >>>---> Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by >>>---> optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the >>>---> Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for >>>---> grabs. >>>---> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev >>>---> _______________________________________________ >>>---> Clonezilla-live mailing list >>>---> Clo...@li... >>>---> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clonezilla-live > |
From: Les M. <les...@gm...> - 2010-12-01 16:38:15
|
On 12/1/2010 9:55 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > Hello > > I tried to use clonezilla. > > While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically > at putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. > > 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs http://clonezilla.org/clonezilla-live/doc/ While I agree with some of your points regarding usability, you have an odd way of asking for help. -- Les Mikesell les...@gm... |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-01 17:03:04
|
On 1 December 2010 17:38, Les Mikesell <les...@gm...> wrote: > On 12/1/2010 9:55 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> Hello >> >> I tried to use clonezilla. >> >> While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically >> at putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. >> >> 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs > > http://clonezilla.org/clonezilla-live/doc/ > > While I agree with some of your points regarding usability, you have an > odd way of asking for help. > I succeeded in making a 1:1 disk copy even without this guide. The process is obvious and streamlined (although with some annoying bloat). The issue is I don't want a 1:1 image and not only there is no documentation on doing that, AFAICT it is not reasonably possible. Hence I am merely reporting here that I tried to use clonezilla for that, it failed for me, and I failed to find where the source has any head or tail while looking if such feature could be added. Thanks Michal |
From: Les M. <les...@gm...> - 2010-12-01 17:32:28
|
On 12/1/2010 11:02 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > >>> >>> I tried to use clonezilla. >>> >>> While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically >>> at putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. >>> >>> 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs >> >> http://clonezilla.org/clonezilla-live/doc/ >> >> While I agree with some of your points regarding usability, you have an >> odd way of asking for help. >> > > I succeeded in making a 1:1 disk copy even without this guide. The > process is obvious and streamlined (although with some annoying > bloat). > > The issue is I don't want a 1:1 image and not only there is no > documentation on doing that, AFAICT it is not reasonably possible. > > Hence I am merely reporting here that I tried to use clonezilla for > that, it failed for me, and I failed to find where the source has any > head or tail while looking if such feature could be added. Saying that a piece of software wasn't designed to do something that you wish it did is somewhat different from saying that the software sucks. I think the 3 approaches would be to use the proportional resize, clone to identical sizes then resize the last partition and filesystem to include the extra space, or to fdisk your own followed by cloning individual partition images into them, resizing the filesystems after the copy (and installing grub yourself). I agree its not easy and when I've needed to do it I've cheated by using Ghost to do windows and tar to manually built filesystems for Linux to get an initial image sized correctly for the clonezilla master. If I were adding functionality it would be to make it able to automate the partition/filesystem/grub setup to a point where a tar image would drop in so it could do a bare-metal restore of a tar backup made from a live system. But, that's another thing it wasn't designed to do... Without looking at the source, I'd think there must be a point where it calculates the proportional-resize values that you could modify to do what you want. -- Les Mikesell les...@gm... |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-01 19:41:32
|
On 1 December 2010 18:32, Les Mikesell <les...@gm...> wrote: > On 12/1/2010 11:02 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> >>>> >>>> I tried to use clonezilla. >>>> >>>> While there are some bits of good software clonezilla fails epically >>>> at putting these pieces together so that they can be actually used. >>>> >>>> 1) everything is needlessly cryptic and there are virtually no docs >>> >>> http://clonezilla.org/clonezilla-live/doc/ >>> >>> While I agree with some of your points regarding usability, you have an >>> odd way of asking for help. >>> >> >> I succeeded in making a 1:1 disk copy even without this guide. The >> process is obvious and streamlined (although with some annoying >> bloat). > >> >> >> The issue is I don't want a 1:1 image and not only there is no >> documentation on doing that, AFAICT it is not reasonably possible. >> >> Hence I am merely reporting here that I tried to use clonezilla for >> that, it failed for me, and I failed to find where the source has any >> head or tail while looking if such feature could be added. > > Saying that a piece of software wasn't designed to do something that you > wish it did is somewhat different from saying that the software sucks. I > think the 3 approaches would be to use the proportional resize, clone to When it can do proportional sizes adding the ability to specify the sizes is an obvious feature. I can understand that the resizing could be new and new user input requires new UI parts but .. > identical sizes then resize the last partition and filesystem to include the > extra space, or to fdisk your own followed by cloning individual partition for this gparted is suggested but it is not included on the CD? WTF? This also means that you have to set up the bootloader manually, not only the partition table. You are getting to the point when using clonezilla at all is of questionable benefit. You can also run partclone manually. > images into them, resizing the filesystems after the copy (and installing > grub yourself). I agree its not easy and when I've needed to do it I've > cheated by using Ghost to do windows and tar to manually built filesystems > for Linux to get an initial image sized correctly for the clonezilla master. > If I were adding functionality it would be to make it able to automate the > partition/filesystem/grub setup to a point where a tar image would drop in > so it could do a bare-metal restore of a tar backup made from a live system. > But, that's another thing it wasn't designed to do... Live system backups have issues. You sometimes backup temporary/run time files that should not be there or not backup files which are covered by mounts. Also tar does not have extensions for all filesystem features. > > Without looking at the source, I'd think there must be a point where it > calculates the proportional-resize values that you could modify to do what > you want. Looking at the source it even does not have a one-line file saying how to build the media. Surely the authors made some notes over the years of development but it looks like the source is not meant to be used by people outside of the development team, it does not include the notes on how it is used. Thanks Michal |
From: Les M. <les...@gm...> - 2010-12-01 20:12:09
|
On 12/1/2010 1:41 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > >> identical sizes then resize the last partition and filesystem to include the >> extra space, or to fdisk your own followed by cloning individual partition > > for this gparted is suggested but it is not included on the CD? WTF? Hmmm, there must be some tool there that handles the proportional resizing. > This also means that you have to set up the bootloader manually, not > only the partition table. > > You are getting to the point when using clonezilla at all is of > questionable benefit. Yes, but if a tool doesn't do what you happen to want, it doesn't mean the tool is inherently bad. >> If I were adding functionality it would be to make it able to automate the >> partition/filesystem/grub setup to a point where a tar image would drop in >> so it could do a bare-metal restore of a tar backup made from a live system. >> But, that's another thing it wasn't designed to do... > > Live system backups have issues. You sometimes backup temporary/run > time files that should not be there or not backup files which are > covered by mounts. Also tar does not have extensions for all > filesystem features. Yes, I didn't mean to replace the ability to image-clone, just an addition that with a few hints about partition sizes and filesystem types could reconstruct a machine from nightly backups that you make without shutting the system down - or in my case it would be the tar output from backuppc where the backup is stored more efficiently. > Surely the authors made some notes over the years of development but > it looks like the source is not meant to be used by people outside of > the development team, it does not include the notes on how it is used. I can't speak for the author, but I got the impression that clonezilla-live is really a side branch of what they really use which is the PXE-booting DRBL server that would run mostly unattended either booting or cloning a bunch of identical systems. -- Les Mikesell les...@gm... |
From: Gilles <cod...@fr...> - 2010-12-03 09:20:17
|
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:55:27 +0100, Michal Suchanek <hra...@ce...> wrote: >Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if >I wanted to clone a disk using free software. Have you tried RedoBackup? It's a GUI-based live distro that includes a bunch of software to manage images, including gparted, partclone + partimage, etc. www.redobackup.org/features.php |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-03 17:21:28
|
On 3 December 2010 10:08, Gilles <cod...@fr...> wrote: > On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:55:27 +0100, Michal Suchanek > <hra...@ce...> wrote: >>Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if >>I wanted to clone a disk using free software. > > Have you tried RedoBackup? It's a GUI-based live distro that includes > a bunch of software to manage images, including gparted, partclone + > partimage, etc. > > www.redobackup.org/features.php > Did not hear about that before. Redo backup advertizes fewer features compared to Clonezilla, it is basically the Clonezilla "Simple" mode without any of the expert options. Given that only the simple mode is usable in Clonezilla and that Redo also includes Gparted to fix up things after the basic clone and also a simple interface accessible to much wider range of users it is a big win overall. Thanks Michal |
From: Les M. <les...@gm...> - 2010-12-03 17:42:40
|
On 12/3/2010 11:21 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 3 December 2010 10:08, Gilles<cod...@fr...> wrote: >> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:55:27 +0100, Michal Suchanek >> <hra...@ce...> wrote: >>> Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if >>> I wanted to clone a disk using free software. >> >> Have you tried RedoBackup? It's a GUI-based live distro that includes >> a bunch of software to manage images, including gparted, partclone + >> partimage, etc. >> >> www.redobackup.org/features.php >> > > Did not hear about that before. > > Redo backup advertizes fewer features compared to Clonezilla, it is > basically the Clonezilla "Simple" mode without any of the expert > options. > > Given that only the simple mode is usable in Clonezilla and that Redo > also includes Gparted to fix up things after the basic clone and also > a simple interface accessible to much wider range of users it is a big > win overall. It's only a win if you don't use any of the other Clonezilla/DRBL features. Normally we build machines with DRBL's PXE boot on a certain subnet, but we have another NIC on the DRBL server facing our main networks so we can boot a Clonezilla-live CD anywhere and save or restore images from the same location using ssh or nfs for the connection. So I need something that uses the clonezilla format for image storage. -- Les Mikesell les...@gm... |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-03 18:04:51
|
On 3 December 2010 18:42, Les Mikesell <les...@gm...> wrote: > On 12/3/2010 11:21 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> On 3 December 2010 10:08, Gilles<cod...@fr...> wrote: >>> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:55:27 +0100, Michal Suchanek >>> <hra...@ce...> wrote: >>>> Thanks for making clonezilla. It tells me which 5 tools I will need if >>>> I wanted to clone a disk using free software. >>> >>> Have you tried RedoBackup? It's a GUI-based live distro that includes >>> a bunch of software to manage images, including gparted, partclone + >>> partimage, etc. >>> >>> www.redobackup.org/features.php >>> >> >> Did not hear about that before. >> >> Redo backup advertizes fewer features compared to Clonezilla, it is >> basically the Clonezilla "Simple" mode without any of the expert >> options. >> >> Given that only the simple mode is usable in Clonezilla and that Redo >> also includes Gparted to fix up things after the basic clone and also >> a simple interface accessible to much wider range of users it is a big >> win overall. > > It's only a win if you don't use any of the other Clonezilla/DRBL > features. Normally we build machines with DRBL's PXE boot on a certain > subnet, but we have another NIC on the DRBL server facing our main > networks so we can boot a Clonezilla-live CD anywhere and save or > restore images from the same location using ssh or nfs for the > connection. So I need something that uses the clonezilla format for > image storage. > I used the Live CD to try out Clonezilla because it does not require installing a server. If the Live CD is representative of what you can achieve with the server I would not have any use for it anyway. Thanks Michal |
From: Les M. <les...@gm...> - 2010-12-03 18:22:58
|
On 12/3/2010 12:04 PM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > >> It's only a win if you don't use any of the other Clonezilla/DRBL >> features. Normally we build machines with DRBL's PXE boot on a certain >> subnet, but we have another NIC on the DRBL server facing our main >> networks so we can boot a Clonezilla-live CD anywhere and save or >> restore images from the same location using ssh or nfs for the >> connection. So I need something that uses the clonezilla format for >> image storage. >> > I used the Live CD to try out Clonezilla because it does not require > installing a server. > > If the Live CD is representative of what you can achieve with the > server I would not have any use for it anyway. It is handy to drop a one-off image on some network storage (ssh, nfs, windows share) as a backup before doing anything major to a machine even if you don't do any large-scale cloning and the 'alternative' ubuntu-based version stays fairly current with hardware drivers so it works on most machines. But there might be better tools if that is your only need or if you need a different style of resizing. -- Les Mikesell les...@gm... |
From: Steven S. <st...@nc...> - 2010-12-04 15:08:59
|
Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's why we keep improving that. If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take that. If you think it's worthless to you, please ignore it. Clonezilla is just one of the solutions, and you have many choices, including a lot of alternative free software and proprietary software. Choose or buy the best one you like, or create one by yourself. You have freedom to do so. I believe this kind of "sucks" or "not sucks" feeling is not universal, some think it sucks, some feel it good. Please choose the one you like, ignore sucking one. Thanks. Steven. -- Steven Shiau<steven _at_ nchc org tw> <steven _at_ stevenshiau org> National Center for High-performance Computing, Taiwan. http://www.nchc.org.tw Public Key Server PGP Key ID: 1024D/9762755A Fingerprint: A2A1 08B7 C22C 3D06 34DB F4BC 08B3 E3D7 9762 755A |
From: Craig F. <cr...@es...> - 2010-12-05 20:59:30
|
On 5/12/2010 2:08 AM, Steven Shiau wrote: > Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's > why we keep improving that. > If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable > of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take that. > If you think it's worthless to you, please ignore it. Clonezilla is just > one of the solutions, and you have many choices, including a lot of > alternative free software and proprietary software. Choose or buy the > best one you like, or create one by yourself. You have freedom to do so. > I believe this kind of "sucks" or "not sucks" feeling is not universal, > some think it sucks, some feel it good. Please choose the one you like, > ignore sucking one. > Thanks. > > Steven. > Well said Steven :) To those people who feel that Clonezilla is not the perfect solution that they want. Don't use it. No-one is forcing you to use it. Just go away and find your perfect solution elsewhere, don't waste the bandwidth here. Craig |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-04 23:09:32
|
On 4 December 2010 16:08, Steven Shiau <st...@nc...> wrote: > Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's > why we keep improving that. > If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable > of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take that. I am capable of coding but one of the reason why clonezilla sucks is that the "source" comes with no documentation whatsoever. I think that implementing the features I want would be simple in a live CD that has some source docs so that one knows where to look for files to patch but without the docs clonezilla is worthless for me. I can just as well start from scratch. Thanks Michal |
From: Craig F. <cr...@es...> - 2010-12-05 21:25:17
|
On 5/12/2010 10:09 AM, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 4 December 2010 16:08, Steven Shiau<st...@nc...> wrote: >> Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's >> why we keep improving that. >> If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable >> of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take that. > I am capable of coding but one of the reason why clonezilla sucks is > that the "source" comes with no documentation whatsoever. > > I think that implementing the features I want would be simple in a > live CD that has some source docs so that one knows where to look for > files to patch but without the docs clonezilla is worthless for me. > > I can just as well start from scratch. > Then just go away and do it. People here are very tired of your whining. Craig |
From: Steven S. <st...@nc...> - 2010-12-07 10:01:54
|
On 2010/12/5 上午 07:09, Michal Suchanek wrote: > On 4 December 2010 16:08, Steven Shiau<st...@nc...> wrote: >> Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's >> why we keep improving that. >> If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable >> of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take that. > > I am capable of coding but one of the reason why clonezilla sucks is > that the "source" comes with no documentation whatsoever. Or could you please give us a good example how to have a good doc about the source? We will do our best to fill this. > > I think that implementing the features I want would be simple in a > live CD that has some source docs so that one knows where to look for > files to patch but without the docs clonezilla is worthless for me. > > I can just as well start from scratch. Sure. Happy hacking! Steven. > > Thanks > > Michal -- Steven Shiau <steven _at_ nchc org tw> <steven _at_ stevenshiau org> National Center for High-performance Computing, Taiwan. http://www.nchc.org.tw Public Key Server PGP Key ID: 1024D/9762755A Fingerprint: A2A1 08B7 C22C 3D06 34DB F4BC 08B3 E3D7 9762 755A |
From: Michal S. <hra...@ce...> - 2010-12-07 11:43:03
|
On 7 December 2010 11:01, Steven Shiau <st...@nc...> wrote: > > > On 2010/12/5 上午 07:09, Michal Suchanek wrote: >> >> On 4 December 2010 16:08, Steven Shiau<st...@nc...> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks for all the discussions here. Clonezilla is _NOT_ perfect, that's >>> why we keep improving that. >>> If you think it sucks, yet it's still worthy to you, and you are capable >>> of coding, please create patch files and we will be very happy to take >>> that. >> >> I am capable of coding but one of the reason why clonezilla sucks is >> that the "source" comes with no documentation whatsoever. > > Or could you please give us a good example how to have a good doc about the > source? We will do our best to fill this. Good source does not need much in the way of docs because it uses well established build process. Eg. C sources can use autotools which provide their own generic document for building an autotools managed project. Since Clonezilla is debian-live based it could provide a debian-live configuration auto/ and config/ directories which then can be built by simply unpacking the source and typing "lb build". This however requires that all software which is not part of debian be either distributed in the source tarball or put on a publicly accessible properly signed apt repository. If you need help with setting up an apt repository I can send you the script which I use to create mine. It is a one use script and is far from perfect but should be easily adapted for other repositories. I can understand that software is in development and is not always in state to be built this easily. Still you can provide a README file which details - what tools are used to build the source Eg. we build on distribution X version Y.Z using T version A.B.C and U version D.E.F - what steps are required to build - this should record all the commands you type into the terminal after you unpack the source to obtain the built program - what you get - name the built files and their purpose (this is typically only required when complex makefiles or build scripts with multiple build results are used) Thanks Michal |