|
From: Per O. <pe...@ds...> - 2004-02-27 20:49:24
|
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 23:50 +0100, Szakacsits Szabolcs wrote:
>
> OK but unfortunately I don't have much time for it. I'd prefer if you send
> working patches for integrating ntfsimage and ntfsclone and I'd be _very_
> glad to revise, test, use it.
Sure. As I said, I can't promise anything, but I might come up with
something.
> There is a pattern. ntfsimage - ntfsrestore makes sense. Just using
> ntfsimage to image/restore also makes sense.
>
> {ntfsimage, fooimage, barimage, ...} - simgrestore somehow doesn't really
> fit. Where will you distribute simgrestore? Everywhere? They will
> conflict. Separate package? That's a maintaince and user pain.
Good point. One advantage with having a separate utility, however, is
that it can be made very small and doesn't have to be linked to
libntfs. This can be useful for boot floppies where space is
constrained, but since we're moving away from using floppies I guess
this isn't as important anymore.
> In theory you should mostly look only at clone_ntfs() and integrate it
> there.
OK.
> I thought about that also. My problem is, I don't have knowledge about if
> the page file is allowed or it is possible to be used between reboots.
> E.g. Linux swap can definitely be used. So IMHO it's better to backup
> unnecessarily all the time than lose data potentially in some cases
> rarely.
Yes, that's a good point too. As I said, I haven't done any successful
real-world testing so I don't if it's necessary to preserve the page
file or not.
> But I have one related question. How do you know where is the real page
> file? There can be several files called pagefile.sys on an NTFS volume.
My program just looks in the root directory after it, so it doesn't
work with non-standard locations. But there can only be one
pagefile.sys in the root directory, right?
--
Pelle
|
