On Mon, Apr 25, 2011, at 12:04:41 +0200, Klistvud wrote:
> Hmm, perhaps your live system is performing some disk writes *while*
> your dd is doing its thing, thus effectively overwriting
> (corrupting) some sectors already written by dd?
All of the OS versions I was trying in my test environment
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011, at 10:09:58 +0200, Klistvud wrote:
> It would seem we're finally getting somewhere. This should be fairly
> easy to test, namely: performing dd on an *unmounted* (not live)
> system and seeing if it finally works.
Yes, I tried this yesterday. Using dd to write the image to
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011, at 11:02:40 +0800, Huang, Tao wrote:
> to my understanding, writing with dd on a mounted device leads to
> unpredictable results, and never guarantees to work.
I understand what you mean but it does work 100% of the time on the
versions I mentioned including Lenny, just not E
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011, at 09:45:44 +0800, Huang, Tao wrote:
> what do u mean by "live running file system"?
> a mounted file system?
Yes. Debian is installed and running on sda and I am trying to
overwrite the current installation with this disk image.
Thanks,
-Mark
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011, at 22:54:48 +0800, Huang, Tao wrote:
> what about a binary diff on those two written images.
>
> i guess the difference should be at the beginning / end of the device.
> just diff their hex value instead of a real binary diff.
> try
>
> $ dd if=/dev/sda bs=1024 count=1 | hex
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011, at 21:49:39 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> What was the size of image.img in exact bytes? What happened if you
> specified exact image size via "count"? What happened if bs=1024?
The size of image.img is 31457280 bytes. I have tried several ways
below and listed in parentheses w
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 07:13:13 -0500, Mark Kane wrote:
> One thing to add is that the documentation I'm going off of was
> written back in 2008 and specifically mentions doing this
> successfully from Linux (though not sure which distro the author had
> used). I would think
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 21:19:43 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> Upon reflection I'd be willing to bet it's down to the difference
> between versions of coreutils - there's a couple of minor changes up
> until 8.9 (according to NEWS). While most of the changes I've read
> about improve speed and re
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 14:33:34 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> It's possible the script uses ddrescue instead of dd to create the
> image
> - though I still don't understand why that would make a difference.
I could be wrong, but from looking at the script a bit it looks like dd
is used to creat
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 10:54:46 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:
> What commands did you use to create the original image?
>
> If image.img was created by simply:-
> dd if=/dev/sda of=/image.img
> then bs is unnecessary.
I did not create the image directly using dd but rather used a script
which ma
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011, at 19:13:39 +0200, Klistvud wrote:
> Perhaps GRUB/LILO just doesn't find it? Additionally -- and I may be
> off target here -- shouldn't that be 'of=/dev/sdax' (a partition, not
> a device)?
Hi and thanks for the reply.
I should have mentioned this in my original message,
Hi everyone,
I'm trying to write a bootable disk image to a hard drive using dd in
Debian like so:
dd if=image.img of=/dev/sda bs=1M
dd completes without error and appears to have written this
successfully, however when trying to boot from sda the operating system
does not boot properly as if th
12 matches
Mail list logo
