Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #77673 > unrolled thread

Taming The Data Destroyer

Started byLawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
First post2025-11-17 02:31 +0000
Last post2025-11-18 02:07 -0500
Articles 5 on this page of 45 — 12 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-17 02:31 +0000
    Re: Taming The Data Destroyer rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-17 04:18 +0000
      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-11-17 10:42 +0100
        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 01:10 +0000
          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-17 21:08 -0500
      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-17 12:51 +0100
    Re: Taming The Data Destroyer jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2025-11-17 12:55 -0500
      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-11-18 07:06 +1000
        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-17 19:00 -0500
          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2025-11-18 16:31 +1000
            Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-18 07:46 +0100
              Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-18 02:12 -0500
                Re: Taming The Data Destroyer rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-18 23:02 +0000
            Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-18 02:01 -0500
              Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Ralf Fassel <ralfixx@gmx.de> - 2025-11-18 16:24 +0100
                Re: Taming The Data Destroyer The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-18 15:30 +0000
                  Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 22:31 +0000
                Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-18 17:49 +0100
                  Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-19 18:32 -0500
                    Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-20 12:57 +0100
                      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-20 22:53 +0000
                        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-20 22:04 -0500
                      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-20 22:17 -0500
            Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 07:18 +0000
              Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-18 02:34 -0500
                Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-18 08:46 +0100
                  Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 08:09 +0000
                    Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-18 17:55 +0100
                      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 19:35 +0000
                        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-11-19 06:48 +1000
                          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-18 21:40 +0000
                            Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 22:27 +0000
                          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 22:26 +0000
                          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-19 18:23 -0500
                        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-19 02:41 +0100
                  Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-18 03:17 -0500
                    Re: Taming The Data Destroyer The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-11-18 12:12 +0000
                      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-11-18 17:53 +0100
                        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 19:32 +0000
              Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2025-11-18 14:46 +0200
        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-11-20 18:40 +0000
      Re: Taming The Data Destroyer Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-18 00:58 +0000
        Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-17 21:04 -0500
          Re: Taming The Data Destroyer rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-11-18 06:32 +0000
            Re: Taming The Data Destroyer c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-11-18 02:07 -0500

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#77758

Fromcandycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Date2025-11-20 18:40 +0000
Message-ID<slrn10huo03.2k1gk.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
In reply to#77692
Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote at 21:06 this Monday (GMT):
> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>> The "lsblk" command can be handy for confirming which block device you
>>> should be writing to
>> What, you don't parse /proc/partitions yourself?
>
> I like "fdisk -l". The "lsblk" output is more condensed, but that
> also makes it easier to get mixed up between lines. On a system
> with lots of drives/partitions the "lsblk" output is obviously
> better, but I'd double check with "fdisk -l /dev/[drive]" before
> doing something as serious as writing over a partition's contents.


fdisk requires sudo to work, and also doesn't seem to display the drie
label...
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77694

FromLawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Date2025-11-18 00:58 +0000
Message-ID<10fggbe$187pd$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#77689
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:55:20 -0500, jayjwa wrote:

>> The “lsblk” command can be handy for confirming which block device you
>> should be writing to
>
> What, you don't parse /proc/partitions yourself?

    lsblk -J

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77698

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2025-11-17 21:04 -0500
Message-ID<R5ycnRlxMf2JSYb0nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#77694
On 11/17/25 19:58, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:55:20 -0500, jayjwa wrote:
> 
>>> The “lsblk” command can be handy for confirming which block device you
>>> should be writing to
>>
>> What, you don't parse /proc/partitions yourself?
> 
>      lsblk -J

   Why re-invent the wheel eh ? Parsing /proc/partitions
   is a pain. 'lsblk' already does if for you. You can
   redirect output to a file or capture it direct with
   system calls in various langs.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77704

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2025-11-18 06:32 +0000
Message-ID<mo2i7aFrmmhU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#77698
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 21:04:04 -0500, c186282 wrote:

> On 11/17/25 19:58, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:55:20 -0500, jayjwa wrote:
>> 
>>>> The “lsblk” command can be handy for confirming which block device
>>>> you should be writing to
>>>
>>> What, you don't parse /proc/partitions yourself?
>> 
>>      lsblk -J
> 
>    Why re-invent the wheel eh ? Parsing /proc/partitions is a pain.
>    'lsblk' already does if for you. You can redirect output to a file or
>    capture it direct with system calls in various langs.

Particularly when 'lsblk -e7' gets rid of the 67 loops snap happily 
creates on Ubuntu.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#77707

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2025-11-18 02:07 -0500
Message-ID<u9ecnVnuRae8hoH0nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com>
In reply to#77704
On 11/18/25 01:32, rbowman wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 21:04:04 -0500, c186282 wrote:
> 
>> On 11/17/25 19:58, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:55:20 -0500, jayjwa wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The “lsblk” command can be handy for confirming which block device
>>>>> you should be writing to
>>>>
>>>> What, you don't parse /proc/partitions yourself?
>>>
>>>       lsblk -J
>>
>>     Why re-invent the wheel eh ? Parsing /proc/partitions is a pain.
>>     'lsblk' already does if for you. You can redirect output to a file or
>>     capture it direct with system calls in various langs.
> 
> Particularly when 'lsblk -e7' gets rid of the 67 loops snap happily
> creates on Ubuntu.


   Yep, there are ways to cut out the 'useful' BS and
   get at the meat you WANT.

   For immediate use, just run it, but if you need
   some programmatic analysis then cutting out the BS
   is very useful.

   Think I have only ONE app that needs to parse lsblk
   output ... but to-the-point output DOES make it
   all much easier.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web