Imaging dual-boot system

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by dogbite, Aug 28, 2015.

  1. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Please go back and do a little research on file system and OS. An imager does not need to be optimized for any specific LInux systems in order to get the best performance to image the said LInux systems. It only need to fully support EXT4/3/2 in order to best its backup/restore of Linux OS. LInux OS is not some mysterious OS, it's only files (bit of 0 and 1) spread on a EXT4/3/2 file system. An imager only support or don't support an file system such as EXT4, it has nothing to do with Linux OS itself. So when MR said it fully support EXT4, it already said clearly it fully support/optimized for imaging any LInxu system that are installed in a EXT4 file system.
    If you read the system requirements of these imagers, you'll see that they say they support NTFS, EXT4/3/2, FAT32 etc but they do not say LInux, WIndows, DOS etc. THere is a reason for that.
    In that aspect, there is no difference between IFL/IFW and MR.
     
  2. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,680
    Location:
    USA
    I will have to respectfully disagree with this statement. For example, if a backup utility does not understand Windows OS and only understands NTFS, it will end up backing up pagefile, hibernation file, system restore points etc. on a Windows system, taking extra long time for backup to complete and produce a huge image size. A backup utility has to be designed to work with a particular OS, not just a filing system.
     
  3. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Well, theoretically what you said makes sense. In reality though, there is only Windows/DOS OS using NTFS nowadays, so practically NTFS support means Windows support. Even for different distros of Linux OSes, they use the same OS structure. I can not imagine an imager that claimed that it supports NTFS but could not understand the WIndows OS structure, because WIndows is the only OS on NTFS nowadays. So again, an imager does not need to be specifically designed for any OS, because there is only certain OS in each file system. So my point stands.
     
  4. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    Good question. TeraByte Unlimited is big on modular software. Multiple apps to do various jobs. IFD works from a DOS (or TBOS) environment. Despite the DOS word it is still widely used although I find it the slowest of the three. It works on a floppy, CD, UFD or HD. It is very simple to automate because of the DOS commands. It's drawback is it may not always see USB external HDs as it relies on the BIOS to recognize the hardware. IFL on the other hand doesn't rely on the BIOS and will see a USB external HD that isn't seen by IFD. So although you might get by with using only one app, your next door neighbour with different hardware might need a different app. I do all backup imaging with IFW and most restoring with IFL because it's faster than IFW or IFD on my systems. But I must be fortunate because all three work with my hardware.

    IFW works in Windows and a WinPE.

    IFD doesn't support USB3 and can't be used with UEFI systems. IFD is the imaging app in BIBM.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2015
  5. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,680
    Location:
    USA
    Supporting a file system just means that the imaging utility understands the file system. For NTFS, it would mean that the imaging utility understands the MFT, and how the file system organizes data on the partition, and partition structures etc. Having an understanding of the file system does not necessarily mean that the imaging utility will automatically understand the OS installed on the file system. One can format a HDD with NTFS and just use it for storing data and not install any OS on it. File system support is still needed to image data on such a HDD for an intelligent sector copy.

    So when Macrium says that it supports Ext partitions, they say quite clearly that the support is for the intelligent sector copy only. I have not read anywhere that Macrium is designed for Linux systems. This is probably why it is not good at backing Linux and should not be used specifically for Linux.
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2015
  6. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,680
    Location:
    USA
    Thanks for the explanation. I have used BIBM just once, but did not like it, because first they make you use a boot disk and then it literally is bare metal, no fancy GUI. Paragon Hard Disk Manager has served all my partitioning needs quite satisfactorily.
     
  7. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    OK, I give up, LOL. It appears you have a different understanding of some plain language that are very easy to understand. You believe in whatever way you believe in.
     
  8. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    I have BIBM installed on the HD and don't use a boot disk. I must have simple tastes as I like the GUI. I agree it is bare metal when it comes to changing partitions. I didn't like that at first but I now prefer it over the coloured GUIs with sliding rectangles. I no longer need to see partition rectangles. There is an accompanying app to BIBM that is run from a command line (TBOSDT for BootIt). You can do all of your partitioning from a command line and automate it if desired. Interesting but specialized.

    IFL now contains the Partition Work component of BIBM which I find extremely useful as you can use this in a UEFI system. To use a BIBM disk in a UEFI system you have to temporarily change the BIOS from UEFI to Legacy.

    One nice feature of Partition Work is Undelete. It's possible to delete all 4 partitions on a UEFI Win10 system, restart and then recover all your partitions and boot into Win10.
     
  9. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,680
    Location:
    USA
    Agreed :)

    I wonder what the OP will make of all this. Poor guy just wanted a straight answer on what to use to backup his entire HDD that has both Windows and Linux installed.

    He can at least rule out Macrium for his system from all this discussion, as clearly Macrium is not meant for a system on which Linux is the main OS and Windows is the secondary OS.
     
  10. Raza0007

    Raza0007 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Posts:
    1,680
    Location:
    USA
    I must have missed the fact the you can install BIBM on the HDD. But I only used it once, so I did not play with it.

    I believe Paragon can also undelete partitions. I have used it to undelete one partition at a time, never all partitions at once, but I am sure if put to the test it will undelete all partitions as well. Give it a try next time, maybe you will like it. I recommend Paragon Hard Disk Manager, as it has both imaging and partitioning functionalities and is a very powerful tool for HDD management.
     
  11. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    LOL yes agreed on this. The op probably should look at IFL/IFW, Paragon HDM and Clonezilla. These are tested and worked for a dual OS setup.
     
  12. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    You really only need it installed if you are multi-booting. I have 14 bootable primary partitions on my SSD so it is needed.
     
  13. jima

    jima Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    Posts:
    141
    Most of this is way over my head, but I wonder if I could ask a very basic question of you guys?

    I am running win 8.1 and use Macrium Reflect free.

    I was thinking of trying a dual boot trial with linux mint 17.2 and was wondering - if I made an image before I installed mint as a dual boot and later decided I wanted to revert back to win 8.1 only - could I just restore the image I made before the linux install? would all traces of the linux install be gone, including any changes to the boot menu, or partitions that might have been created?
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2015
  14. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,945
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Yep... if you image the WHOLE disk and restore the WHOLE disk.
     
  15. Firebytes

    Firebytes Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    917
    I use Macrium Reflect v5 all the time to image both a dual boot system with Linux Mint/WinXP and a system that is Linux Mint only. I have had no issues creating and restoring images or booting the systems afterwards. Granted, I did create a WinPE CD while Windows was still installed on both systems and use it to boot the system and create/restore images.
     
  16. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Sounds like you are using a BIOS legacy system. If your OS were installed in UEFI mode with secure boot turned on, Macrium shows strange/weird behavior when imaging EXT4 file system. So if you indeed are using a BIOS system you are fine using Macrium.
     
  17. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Yes, as the Froggie said, image the whole disk before you start installing Linux Mint.
     
  18. dogbite

    dogbite Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Posts:
    1,290
    Location:
    EU
    LOL...I am overwhelmed ... but thanks guys. Actually I am going to try Clonezilla first. Imaging the whole drive.
     
  19. discs

    discs Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    UK
    The last post in this conversation was nearly 9 months ago; I hope its ok to renew the discussion.

    This thread is a very informative and useful one; thank you to all those who have contributed.

    I am on Win 7 (happily using Macrium 5 free). I am learning about and transiting to Linux - through Bodhi Linux, Ubuntu based. After reading the above, for Linux imaging, I am now going to choose between Paragon, Macrium (I don't have uefi), Clonzella or IFL.

    Let's say I use Macrium for a Linux backup image. Will I subsequently be able to browse/extract, say, ext4 files, from the image and copy them elsewhere? I gather this is not possible with Clonzella; I don't know about Paragon.

    Otherwise, a factor which may well swing my choice towards a purchase of IFL is the free TBIView add-on for IFL. Quoting from the Terrabyte website: TBIView allows you to open, browse, and extract files or folders from TeraByte Unlimited image files that are based on a EXT2/3/4, FAT, FAT32 or NTFS partition.

    I have through many years of using Macrium become used to occasionally using this browse/extract facility. Has someone here used TBIView? Will TBIView work in Linux as Macrium's extract does for dragging or copying files from an image to other partitions on the system? I may eventually opt for IFL if this is the case.
     
  20. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    discs,

    TBIView has Linux and Windows versions. It's also present on the IFL boot disk. It can extract files/folders from your TeraByte images and copy them to a folder of your choice.

    For example, you can run TBIView in Windows or Linux and extract files/folders from images of Windows or Linux partitions.
     
  21. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Quality-wise, Terabyte IFL/IFW is the most robust piece of imaging software that I've tried so far. I never had any problems over about a decade of using it. It can be used to image any popular file systems: EXT3/4, XFS, NTFS, HFS+ etc, so you have Win/Linux/Mac all covered with a single boot USB.
    It's the best purchase I've made for disk imaging software.
     
  22. discs

    discs Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Posts:
    44
    Location:
    UK
    Thanks Brian/oliverjia. I have spent some time today looking at IFL in greater detail.
     
  23. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    oliverjia,

    I know you like cold backups. Have you tried the IFL boot file method? You could do automated IFL backups at 3 AM if you desire. But it doesn't work with UEFI systems.
     
  24. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,926
    Thanks Brian for the tip. All my computers are UEFI with secure boot turned on so I have not tried the IFL boot file way of backup. I can see it'll be very convenient for automated backup. Like you mentioned, I only do cold backups. Also I only do one immediate backup right after the fresh install of OS+Programs, since that's when the OS is the cleanest, with least chance of being infected.
     
  25. Brian K

    Brian K Imaging Specialist

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Posts:
    12,113
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    OK. This wouldn't suit you but one can do an automated backup on a UEFI system at 3 AM using an IFL UFD. (containing a backup script)
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.