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

Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #2282 > unrolled thread

Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

Contents

  Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 16:31 -0800
    Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 17:57 +1100
    Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-06 09:46 +0000
      Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "john james" <jj@jj.com> - 2012-01-07 08:02 +1100
      Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 21:55 -0800
        Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 14:15 +0000
          Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 13:12 -0800
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 22:50 +0000
              Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 16:27 -0800
    Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Winniethepooh@100acrewoods.net (GMAN) - 2012-01-06 16:39 +0000
      Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 08:14 +1100
        Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Winniethepooh@100acrewoods.net (GMAN) - 2012-01-06 21:35 +0000
          Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 14:46 +1100
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 22:07 -0800
              Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 14:19 +0000
                Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "john james" <jj@jj.com> - 2012-01-08 06:28 +1100
                  Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 22:51 +0000
              Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 07:33 +1100
                Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 13:31 -0800
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Winniethepooh@100acrewoods.net (GMAN) - 2012-01-07 15:44 +0000
              Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 07:09 +1100
          Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Krypsis <krypsis@optusnet.com.au> - 2012-01-08 01:40 +1100
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 06:54 +1100
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> - 2012-01-07 13:19 -0800
            Re: Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition? Arno <me@privacy.net> - 2012-01-07 22:56 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#2282 — Does shrinking a partition lop off content at top of partition?

I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not creating
an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the plans in the
future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure, I can drop the
clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source down a new HDD).
Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace the current HDD.

From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring that
I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD until I've
confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all partitions in the
target HDD.

However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found that
the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further details
but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
(2) in the clone.

As an alternative to on-the-fly resizing, Tech support suggested
shrinking partition 2 on the source HDD before cloning, reassuring me
that it is safe and common practice.  In fact, Windows 7 includes
functionality for adjusting partitions.

I am new to disk management and don't have a detailed picture of how
partition shrinkage works.  I imagine my C-drive partition to have
content scattered throughout the partition, even though I use a
miniscule portion of the capacity.  Even after a defrag, you can't
assume that all the content is compressed to the bottom of the
partition, and when you boot up, who knows at where in the partition
the OS is utilizing disk space from.

My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive partition
without fear of amputating content in the space that becomes unused
space?

P.S. In a related note (related to the context of the above question,
that is), is there a way to test the 2 recovery functions of the
cloned partitions 3 & 4?  For (1), I can burn recovery discs again,
but it seems a waste (and I'd have to figure out how to compare them
with my existing recovery discs).  For (2), I'd have to perform a disc-
less recovery, which I don't really want to do.  I like having my
current system state (though I suppose if it's just the clone HDD that
reverts to factory state, no big deal).  I'm wondering if there is a
simpler, faster indicator of correct functionality.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2287

AndyHancock wrote

> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not creating
> an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the plans in the
> future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure, I can drop the
> clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source down a new HDD).
> Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace the current HDD.

> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
> C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
> content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
> Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
> that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
> partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring that
> I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD until I've
> confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all partitions in the target HDD.

> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found that
> the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further details
> but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
> creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
> restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
> pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
> (2) in the clone.

> As an alternative to on-the-fly resizing, Tech support suggested
> shrinking partition 2 on the source HDD before cloning, reassuring me
> that it is safe and common practice.  In fact, Windows 7 includes
> functionality for adjusting partitions.

I cant see that doing that will help if the recovery code is so crude that
it assume the physical location of the recovery partitions on the drives.

> I am new to disk management and don't have a detailed picture of how
> partition shrinkage works.  I imagine my C-drive partition to have
> content scattered throughout the partition, even though I use a
> miniscule portion of the capacity.  Even after a defrag, you can't
> assume that all the content is compressed to the bottom of the
> partition, and when you boot up, who knows at where in the partition
> the OS is utilizing disk space from.
>
> My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive partition
> without fear of amputating content in the space that becomes unused space?

Basically what is doing the shrinking moves what is in the part of the
partition that will no longer be part of the partition after the shrink,
in a process similar to how a defrag works, moving files that matter.

> P.S. In a related note (related to the context of the above question,
> that is), is there a way to test the 2 recovery functions of the
> cloned partitions 3 & 4?

Yes, you can make the clone, then install the clone in place of the
original drive, and try the recovery operations and see if they work.

If they dont, you have lost nothing, you can just put the original drive back in the laptop again.

> For (1), I can burn recovery discs again, but it seems a waste

You might be able to use RW media and reuse that.

Most likely if the clone to a different size drive stops the creation
of the recovery disks it will likely just refuse to create them so you
wont have wasted any blanks.

> (and I'd have to figure out how to compare them with my existing recovery discs).

Its very unlikely that it will appear to create viable recover disks but in practice
the contents wont be right. Normally it will just refuse to create the recovery disks.

> For (2), I'd have to perform a disc- less recovery, which I don't really want to do.

Its harmless to try that with the new clone of the original drive.

> I like having my current system state (though I suppose if it's
> just the clone HDD that reverts to factory state, no big deal).

Particularly with the newly cloned drive, you can just put the original drive back in again.

> I'm wondering if there is a simpler, faster indicator of correct functionality.

Fraid not. 

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

#2288

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not creating
> an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the plans in the
> future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure, I can drop the
> clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source down a new HDD).
> Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace the current HDD.

> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
> C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
> content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
> Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
> that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
> partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring that
> I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD until I've
> confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all partitions in the
> target HDD.

> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found that
> the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further details
> but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
> creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
> restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
> pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
> (2) in the clone.

> As an alternative to on-the-fly resizing, Tech support suggested
> shrinking partition 2 on the source HDD before cloning, reassuring me
> that it is safe and common practice.  In fact, Windows 7 includes
> functionality for adjusting partitions.

> I am new to disk management and don't have a detailed picture of how
> partition shrinkage works. 

In that case I strongly suggest you do not attempt it. It can go
wrong.

>  I imagine my C-drive partition to have
> content scattered throughout the partition, even though I use a
> miniscule portion of the capacity.  Even after a defrag, you can't
> assume that all the content is compressed to the bottom of the
> partition, and when you boot up, who knows at where in the partition
> the OS is utilizing disk space from.

> My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive partition
> without fear of amputating content in the space that becomes unused
> space?

Depends on the approach. If you shrink the filesystem first and then
the partition, all data is retained. If you just shring the partition,
the effect you describe takes place.

> P.S. In a related note (related to the context of the above question,
> that is), is there a way to test the 2 recovery functions of the
> cloned partitions 3 & 4?  For (1), I can burn recovery discs again,
> but it seems a waste (and I'd have to figure out how to compare them
> with my existing recovery discs).  For (2), I'd have to perform a disc-
> less recovery, which I don't really want to do.  I like having my
> current system state (though I suppose if it's just the clone HDD that
> reverts to factory state, no big deal).  I'm wondering if there is a
> simpler, faster indicator of correct functionality.

I would recommend getting a disk that you just can to a 1:1 
clone to. A bit more expensive, but a lot less change of 
desaster, i.e. loss of the current disk. In any case before
attempting dangerous operations like a filesystem and/or
paertition resize, a full backup is non-optional.

Oh, and stay away from Parition Magic. It has a nasty habit
of crashing in the middle of the process and messing up 
the disk beyond recovery in the process.

Arno
-- 
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name
GnuPG:  ID: 1E25338F  FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C  0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

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

#2300

Arno wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock
> <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not
>> creating an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the
>> plans in the future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure,
>> I can drop the clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source
>> down a new HDD). Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace
>> the current HDD.
>
>> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
>> C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
>> content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
>> Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
>> that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
>> partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring
>> that I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD
>> until I've confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all
>> partitions in the target HDD.
>
>> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found
>> that the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further
>> details but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
>> creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
>> restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
>> pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
>> (2) in the clone.
>
>> As an alternative to on-the-fly resizing, Tech support suggested
>> shrinking partition 2 on the source HDD before cloning, reassuring me
>> that it is safe and common practice.  In fact, Windows 7 includes
>> functionality for adjusting partitions.
>
>> I am new to disk management and don't have a detailed picture of how
>> partition shrinkage works.
>
> In that case I strongly suggest you do not attempt it. It can go wrong.

Anything can go wrong. Thats why we have backups.

>>  I imagine my C-drive partition to have
>> content scattered throughout the partition, even though I use a
>> miniscule portion of the capacity.  Even after a defrag, you can't
>> assume that all the content is compressed to the bottom of the
>> partition, and when you boot up, who knows at where in the partition
>> the OS is utilizing disk space from.
>
>> My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive
>> partition without fear of amputating content in the space that
>> becomes unused space?
>
> Depends on the approach. If you shrink the filesystem first and then
> the partition, all data is retained. If you just shring the partition,
> the effect you describe takes place.

Not with Win 7 it doesnt.

>> P.S. In a related note (related to the context of the above question,
>> that is), is there a way to test the 2 recovery functions of the
>> cloned partitions 3 & 4?  For (1), I can burn recovery discs again,
>> but it seems a waste (and I'd have to figure out how to compare them
>> with my existing recovery discs).  For (2), I'd have to perform a
>> disc- less recovery, which I don't really want to do.  I like having
>> my current system state (though I suppose if it's just the clone HDD
>> that reverts to factory state, no big deal).  I'm wondering if there
>> is a simpler, faster indicator of correct functionality.

> I would recommend getting a disk that you just can to a 1:1
> clone to. A bit more expensive,

A lot more expensive in fact now that he already has the second drive.

> but a lot less change of desaster, i.e. loss of the current disk.

You cant lose the current disk if you have proper backups.

> In any case before attempting dangerous operations like a
> filesystem and/or paertition resize, a full backup is non-optional.

So there is no risk if it does go pear shaped.

> Oh, and stay away from Parition Magic. It has a nasty habit
> of crashing in the middle of the process and messing up
> the disk beyond recovery in the process.

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

#2309

On Jan 6, 4:46 am, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive partition
>> without fear of amputating content in the space that becomes unused
>> space?
>
> Depends on the approach. If you shrink the filesystem first and then
> the partition, all data is retained. If you just shring the partition,
> the effect you describe takes place.

I'm beginning to realize that it depends on the cloning app, since it
is the thing that is compressing the partition on the fly.

> I would recommend getting a disk that you just can to a 1:1
> clone to. A bit more expensive, but a lot less change of
> desaster, i.e. loss of the current disk. In any case before
> attempting dangerous operations like a filesystem and/or
> paertition resize, a full backup is non-optional.

The target HDD is a bit smaller than the source HDD (500 vs 640 GB),
but both are way, way more than I ever expect to need.  The next step
up is in the order of 750 GB, and way more expensive due to the
current shortage of HDDs (heck even the 500GB was 3x normal price).

I intend to test the clone before relying on it.  Both Norton Ghost
and Acronis True Image are capable of targeting a smaller partition
during cloning, according to forum responses.

> Oh, and stay away from Parition Magic. It has a nasty habit
> of crashing in the middle of the process and messing up
> the disk beyond recovery in the process.

Point taken.  Thanks.

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

#2314

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 4:46 am, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> My main question is: How is it that you can shrink a C-drive partition
>>> without fear of amputating content in the space that becomes unused
>>> space?
>>
>> Depends on the approach. If you shrink the filesystem first and then
>> the partition, all data is retained. If you just shring the partition,
>> the effect you describe takes place.

> I'm beginning to realize that it depends on the cloning app, since it
> is the thing that is compressing the partition on the fly.

>> I would recommend getting a disk that you just can to a 1:1
>> clone to. A bit more expensive, but a lot less change of
>> desaster, i.e. loss of the current disk. In any case before
>> attempting dangerous operations like a filesystem and/or
>> paertition resize, a full backup is non-optional.

> The target HDD is a bit smaller than the source HDD (500 vs 640 GB),
> but both are way, way more than I ever expect to need.  The next step
> up is in the order of 750 GB, and way more expensive due to the
> current shortage of HDDs (heck even the 500GB was 3x normal price).

> I intend to test the clone before relying on it.  Both Norton Ghost
> and Acronis True Image are capable of targeting a smaller partition
> during cloning, according to forum responses.

You can also clone 1:1 partition by partition and 
shrink them individually before cloning the next one. 

>> Oh, and stay away from Parition Magic. It has a nasty habit
>> of crashing in the middle of the process and messing up
>> the disk beyond recovery in the process.

> Point taken.  Thanks.

As to app, I made good experiences on two Win 7 installations 
(Lenove T510i and Samsung  n140) shrinking the pre-install 
with gparted on Linux. It does not clone though AFAIK. 
(Could be mistaken.)

Arno
-- 
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name
GnuPG:  ID: 1E25338F  FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C  0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

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

#2332

On Jan 7, 9:15 am, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The target HDD is a bit smaller than the source HDD (500 vs 640
>> GB), but both are way, way more than I ever expect to need.  The
>> next step up is in the order of 750 GB, and way more expensive due
>> to the current shortage of HDDs (heck even the 500GB was 3x normal
>> price).  I intend to test the clone before relying on it.  Both
>> Norton Ghost and Acronis True Image are capable of targeting a
>> smaller partition during cloning, according to forum responses.
>
> You can also clone 1:1 partition by partition and shrink them
> individually before cloning the next one.

Hmm, never thought of that.  Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority
of the source HDD is the C-drive partition, which is 559.5 GB (larger
than the target HDD capacity of 500 GB).

> As to app, I made good experiences on two Win 7 installations
> (Lenove T510i and Samsung  n140) shrinking the pre-install with
> gparted on Linux. It does not clone though AFAIK.  (Could be
> mistaken.)

In general, how much can one extrapolate from partitioning experience
with Linux to Windows?

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

#2335

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 7, 9:15 am, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The target HDD is a bit smaller than the source HDD (500 vs 640
>>> GB), but both are way, way more than I ever expect to need.  The
>>> next step up is in the order of 750 GB, and way more expensive due
>>> to the current shortage of HDDs (heck even the 500GB was 3x normal
>>> price).  I intend to test the clone before relying on it.  Both
>>> Norton Ghost and Acronis True Image are capable of targeting a
>>> smaller partition during cloning, according to forum responses.
>>
>> You can also clone 1:1 partition by partition and shrink them
>> individually before cloning the next one.

> Hmm, never thought of that.  Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority
> of the source HDD is the C-drive partition, which is 559.5 GB (larger
> than the target HDD capacity of 500 GB).

Ok.

>> As to app, I made good experiences on two Win 7 installations
>> (Lenove T510i and Samsung  n140) shrinking the pre-install with
>> gparted on Linux. It does not clone though AFAIK.  (Could be
>> mistaken.)

> In general, how much can one extrapolate from partitioning experience
> with Linux to Windows?

Mostly. For the partitions themselves, fully, for the filesystems
by now shrinking NTFS also works with gparted. I am not sure about 
booting, as I put in grub (lagacy) anyways. While Grub does boot
Win7, administrating it from Windows is at least complicated, 
last I checked. For cloning 1:1, dd or dd_rescue works fine, of
course.

Arno
-- 
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name
GnuPG:  ID: 1E25338F  FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C  0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

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

#2339

On Jan 7, 5:50 pm, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhanc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In general, how much can one extrapolate from partitioning experience
> > with Linux to Windows?
>
> Mostly. For the partitions themselves, fully, for the filesystems
> by now shrinking NTFS also works with gparted. I am not sure about
> booting, as I put in grub (lagacy) anyways. While Grub does boot
> Win7, administrating it from Windows is at least complicated,
> last I checked. For cloning 1:1, dd or dd_rescue works fine, of
> course.

I think I'll stay out of that sandbox until I get at least a little
bit more smarter on this imaging/cloning/partitioning/file-system
thing.  Currently surfing to get smart on the partitioning bit.

Thanks.

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

#2291

In article <078d0503-909a-4956-a6bd-3282e9945e31@dp8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
>I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not creating
>an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the plans in the
>future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure, I can drop the
>clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source down a new HDD).
>Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace the current HDD.
>
>From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
>C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
>content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
>Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
>that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
>partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring that
>I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD until I've
>confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all partitions in the
>target HDD.
>
>However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found that
>the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further details
>but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
>creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
>restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
>pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
>(2) in the clone.
>

The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should have 
proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in app.  

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

#2302

GMAN wrote
> AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote

>> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not
>> creating an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the
>> plans in the future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure,
>> I can drop the clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source
>> down a new HDD). Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace
>> the current HDD.

>> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
>> C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
>> content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
>> Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
>> that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
>> partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring
>> that I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD
>> until I've confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all
>> partitions in the target HDD.

>> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found
>> that the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further
>> details but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
>> creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
>> restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
>> pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
>> (2) in the clone.

> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in app.

No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under warranty
if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.

The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created anytime is because
it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks after they have been created. 

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

#2305

In article <9mp6gsFg7lU1@mid.individual.net>, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>GMAN wrote
>> AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>>> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not
>>> creating an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the
>>> plans in the future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware failure,
>>> I can drop the clone into the laptop, be up and running (and source
>>> down a new HDD). Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD can displace
>>> the current HDD.
>
>>> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is the
>>> C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery operations and
>>> content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis True Image and
>>> Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the cloning process so
>>> that all partititions fit in the target HDD, without requiring the
>>> partitions to be resized in the source HDD.  I find it reassuring
>>> that I don't have to mess with the partitions on the source HDD
>>> until I've confirmed the integrity & full functionality of all
>>> partitions in the target HDD.
>
>>> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>>> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found
>>> that the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further
>>> details but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1) the
>>> creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and (2)
>>> restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this by
>>> pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions (1) and
>>> (2) in the clone.
>
>> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
>> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in app.
>
>No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under warranty
>if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.


Most the time, the warranty doesnt cover when someone messes up their pc due 
to a software issue. Like if someone went and manually deleted a critical 
windows DLL , the pc manufacturer would just tell the customer to resintall 
from their recover disks or partition. 

Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the US software issues are 
not covered under warranty.

>
>The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created anytime is because
>it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks after they have been created. 
>
>
Agreed, but most pc makers ony allow the creation of 1 set of disks and then 
the software wont create anymore. I always copy the disks after i have made 
the recovery set and keep them at a relatives house.

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

#2307

GMAN wrote:
> In article <9mp6gsFg7lU1@mid.individual.net>, "Rod Speed"
> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> GMAN wrote
>>> AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote
>>
>>>> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>>>> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not
>>>> creating an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the
>>>> plans in the future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware
>>>> failure, I can drop the clone into the laptop, be up and running
>>>> (and source down a new HDD). Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD
>>>> can displace the current HDD.
>>
>>>> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is
>>>> the C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery
>>>> operations and content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis
>>>> True Image and Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the
>>>> cloning process so that all partititions fit in the target HDD,
>>>> without requiring the partitions to be resized in the source HDD.
>>>> I find it reassuring that I don't have to mess with the partitions
>>>> on the source HDD until I've confirmed the integrity & full
>>>> functionality of all partitions in the target HDD.
>>
>>>> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>>>> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found
>>>> that the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further
>>>> details but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1)
>>>> the creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and
>>>> (2) restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this
>>>> by pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions
>>>> (1) and (2) in the clone.
>>
>>> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
>>> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in
>>> app.
>>
>> No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under
>> warranty
>> if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.

> Most the time, the warranty doesnt cover when someone messes up their
> pc due to a software issue.

You dont need the recovery disks for that, thats what the diskless recovery is for.

> Like if someone went and manually deleted a critical
> windows DLL , the pc manufacturer would just tell the
> customer to resintall from their recover disks or partition.

And since that doesnt affect the recovery partition, you dont need the recovery disks.

> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
> US software issues are not covered under warranty.

Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.

>> The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created anytime is because
>> it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks after they have been created.

> Agreed, but most pc makers ony allow the creation of
> 1 set of disks and then the software wont create anymore.

He says that that isnt true with that Toshiba.

> I always copy the disks after i have made the
> recovery set and keep them at a relatives house.

I dont bother, because they are buyable in the unlikely event
that your house burns down or is washed away by a flood etc.

If I need to use them after an event like that, the laptop is normally history too. 

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

#2308

On Jan 6, 10:46 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> GMAN wrote:
>> <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> GMAN wrote
>>>> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
>>>> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in
>>>> app.
>
>>> No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under
>>> warranty
>>> if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.
>> Most the time, the warranty doesnt cover when someone messes up their
>> pc due to a software issue.
>
> You dont need the recovery disks for that, thats what the diskless recovery is for.

I made the Toshiba recovery discs as soon as I started to learn about
backing up, which started when I tried to find a solution to HDD
cloning.

>> Like if someone went and manually deleted a critical
>> windows DLL , the pc manufacturer would just tell the
>> customer to resintall from their recover disks or partition.
>
> And since that doesnt affect the recovery partition, you dont need
> the recovery disks.

I didn't tell the full story.  The auxiliary cloned HDD is a higher
performance drive, so I will swap it with my internal HDD.  The latter
will become the auxiliary target for weekly cloning.  So the recovery
partitions will no longer be in my internal HDD.  That doesn't
ncessarily preclude using them for their intended purpose, since the
auxiliary drive will be connected to the laptop via eSATA -- the
machine can boot from eSATA.

It would be much nicer, though, if the recovery partitions were in my
(new higher performance) internal HDD.  This might free enough space
in the auxiliary drive for images (the auxiliary drive was originally
the internal HDD, and is the larger HDD).

>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.
>
> Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.

I'm in Canada, and I'm not sure what the rule is.

>>> The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created anytime is because
>>> it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks after they have been created.
>> Agreed, but most pc makers ony allow the creation of
>> 1 set of disks and then the software wont create anymore.
>
> He says that that isnt true with that Toshiba.

I'm not actually sure, but I will find out by going through the
cloning and testing process.  Worse that can happen is that it I can't
reburn recovery discs.  That solves the problem right there.

>> I always copy the disks after i have made the
>> recovery set and keep them at a relatives house.
>
> I dont bother, because they are buyable in the unlikely event
> that your house burns down or is washed away by a flood etc.
>
> If I need to use them after an event like that, the laptop is
> normally history too.

That's always a possibility too, but for now, I'll proceed as if they
will do some good.

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

#2315

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 10:46 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

>>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.
>>
>> Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.

> I'm in Canada, and I'm not sure what the rule is.

In all the world the rule is that at the very most you can give it
back for a refound. Even if it sets your house on fire, unless 
you can prove intent (basically impossible), you get nothing.

Software vendors make very sure that you have no rights, as they
do know their products typically are defective by any sane 
engineering criteria.

Arno

-- 
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name
GnuPG:  ID: 1E25338F  FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C  0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

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

#2325

Arno wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock
> <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 6, 10:46 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>>>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>>>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.
>>>
>>> Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.
>
>> I'm in Canada, and I'm not sure what the rule is.

> In all the world the rule is that at the very most you can give it back for a refound.

Wrong, as always.

> Even if it sets your house on fire,

Wrong, as always.

> unless you can prove intent (basically impossible),

Wrong, as always.

> you get nothing.

Wrong, as always.

> Software vendors make very sure that you have no rights,

They cant dod that in any jurisdiction with even half a clue.

> as they do know their products typically are defective by any sane engineering criteria.

Even sillier. 

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

#2336

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage john james <jj@jj.com> wrote:
> Arno wrote:
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AndyHancock
>> <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jan 6, 10:46 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>>>>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.
>>>>
>>>> Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.
>>
>>> I'm in Canada, and I'm not sure what the rule is.

>> In all the world the rule is that at the very most you can give it back for a refound.

> Wrong, as always.

Ah, mister clueless at it again. Pathetic, as always.

Arno


>> Even if it sets your house on fire,

> Wrong, as always.

>> unless you can prove intent (basically impossible),

> Wrong, as always.

>> you get nothing.

> Wrong, as always.

>> Software vendors make very sure that you have no rights,

> They cant dod that in any jurisdiction with even half a clue.

>> as they do know their products typically are defective by any sane engineering criteria.

> Even sillier. 



-- 
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno@wagner.name
GnuPG:  ID: 1E25338F  FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C  0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

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

#2331

AndyHancock wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>> GMAN wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> GMAN wrote

>>>>> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
>>>>> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in app.

>>>> No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under warranty
>>>> if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.

>>> Most the time, the warranty doesnt cover when someone messes up
>>> their pc due to a software issue.

>> You dont need the recovery disks for that, thats what the diskless
>> recovery is for.

> I made the Toshiba recovery discs as soon as I started to learn about
> backing up, which started when I tried to find a solution to HDD cloning.

Yeah, thats a good idea when you arent sure you have the basics right yet.

It does give you more options if you manage to stuff things up
and say cant use the diskless recovery because you have moved
the partition that does that and the system is too crude to allow it
to work after its been moved.

>>> Like if someone went and manually deleted a critical
>>> windows DLL , the pc manufacturer would just tell the
>>> customer to resintall from their recover disks or partition.

>> And since that doesnt affect the recovery partition, you dont need the recovery disks.

> I didn't tell the full story.  The auxiliary cloned HDD is a higher
> performance drive, so I will swap it with my internal HDD.

OK.

> The latter will become the auxiliary target for weekly cloning.
> So the recovery partitions will no longer be in my internal HDD.
> That doesn't ncessarily preclude using them for their intended
> purpose, since the auxiliary drive will be connected to the
> laptop via eSATA -- the machine can boot from eSATA.

> It would be much nicer, though, if the recovery partitions were
> in my (new higher performance) internal HDD.  This might free
> enough space in the auxiliary drive for images (the auxiliary
> drive was originally the internal HDD, and is the larger HDD).

Thats a more risky config tho, easier to stuff that up.

>>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.

>> Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.

> I'm in Canada, and I'm not sure what the rule is.

Its the same, if it was supplied defective, or goes bad due to
something the manufacturer stuffed up that sees it develop
a fault due to that, its still covered by warranty.

Arno is just plain wrong on that.

>>>> The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created
>>>> anytime is because it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks
>>>> after they have been created.

>>> Agreed, but most pc makers ony allow the creation of
>>> 1 set of disks and then the software wont create anymore.

>> He says that that isnt true with that Toshiba.

> I'm not actually sure,

The systems that only allow one set of recovery disks to be burnt usually say that.

> but I will find out by going through the cloning and testing process.
> Worse that can happen is that it I can't reburn recovery discs.

Yes, but you can certainly copy those to cover the situation where you lose one set.

Obviously it makes no sense to keep all the copys in one place.

> That solves the problem right there.

>>> I always copy the disks after i have made the
>>> recovery set and keep them at a relatives house.

>> I dont bother, because they are buyable in the unlikely event
>> that your house burns down or is washed away by a flood etc.

>> If I need to use them after an event like that, the laptop is normally history too.

> That's always a possibility too, but for now, I'll proceed as if they will do some good.

Yeah, they might be needed if you stuff up the reconfig of the original drive.

I normally just clone the entire physical drive, but then I have lots of
2TB drives which are currently the best $/GB and have lots because
I am too lazy to clean up the drives that I use for overflow of the PVR,
what has replaced the VCRs etc.

And I havent had just one computer for quite literally decades either. 

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

#2333

On Jan 7, 3:33 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> The systems that only allow one set of recovery disks to be burnt
> usually say that.
>
>AndyHancock wrote:
>> but I will find out by going through the cloning and testing
>> process.  Worse that can happen is that it I can't reburn recovery
>> discs.
>
> Yes, but you can certainly copy those to cover the situation where
> you lose one set.
>
> Obviously it makes no sense to keep all the copys in one place.

If I can ensure that recovery partitions (3 & 4) work in the cloned
HDD (once the cloned HDD becomes my main HDD), I prefer that as a
safety net for being able to recreate recovery discs.  I have too many
discs already.

>>>> I always copy the disks after i have made the recovery set and
>>>> keep them at a relatives house.
>>> I dont bother, because they are buyable in the unlikely event that
>>> your house burns down or is washed away by a flood etc.  If I need
>>> to use them after an event like that, the laptop is normally
>>> history too.
>> That's always a possibility too, but for now, I'll proceed as if
>> they will do some good.
>
> Yeah, they might be needed if you stuff up the reconfig of the
> original drive.
>
> I normally just clone the entire physical drive, but then I have
> lots of 2TB drives which are currently the best $/GB and have lots
> because I am too lazy to clean up the drives that I use for overflow
> of the PVR, what has replaced the VCRs etc.
>
> And I havent had just one computer for quite literally decades
> either.

My plan *is* to clone the internal HDD in its entirety, then use the
higher performance clone as the internal HDD.  Thereafter, I will use
the lower performance HDD as the target of weekly clones.  I might to
still do data backups (though I might get overwhelmed by the amount of
backing up).  In any case, I lose at most a week's stuff, and I always
have factory recovery if I really want to start from a clean slate.

Thanks for your perspective on my crafty scheme.

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

#2321

In article <9mptrrFgd3U1@mid.individual.net>, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>GMAN wrote:
>> In article <9mp6gsFg7lU1@mid.individual.net>, "Rod Speed"
>> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> GMAN wrote
>>>> AndyHancock <andymhancock@gmail.com> wrote
>>>
>>>>> I was talking to tech support about cloning all 4 partitions in my
>>>>> Toshiba Satellite A660 laptop to a smaller auxiliary HDD (not
>>>>> creating an image, but a clone -- recoverable image may be in the
>>>>> plans in the future).  If the laptop HDD suffers a hardware
>>>>> failure, I can drop the clone into the laptop, be up and running
>>>>> (and source down a new HDD). Alternatively, the newer (faster) HDD
>>>>> can displace the current HDD.
>>>
>>>>> From asking in forums, partition 1 is for booting, partition 2 is
>>>>> the C-drive, and partitions 3 & 4 are for various recovery
>>>>> operations and content.  According to experienced posters, Acronis
>>>>> True Image and Norton Ghost will both adjust partition 2 in the
>>>>> cloning process so that all partititions fit in the target HDD,
>>>>> without requiring the partitions to be resized in the source HDD.
>>>>> I find it reassuring that I don't have to mess with the partitions
>>>>> on the source HDD until I've confirmed the integrity & full
>>>>> functionality of all partitions in the target HDD.
>>>
>>>>> However, one Toshiba forum poster said that shrinking partition 2
>>>>> causes partitions 3 & 4 to start at lower locations, and he found
>>>>> that the recovery functionality was lost.  I didn't ask for further
>>>>> details but there are two functions he could be referring to: (1)
>>>>> the creationg of recovery discs using a dedicated Toshiba app and
>>>>> (2) restoring to factory state (Toshiba's are designed to do this
>>>>> by pressing 0 during power up).  I want to retain both functions
>>>>> (1) and (2) in the clone.
>>>
>>>> The second you booted that laptop out of the box new, you should
>>>> have proceeded to create those recovery DVD's using the built in
>>>> app.
>>>
>>> No need to do it that urgently when it will be replaced under
>>> warranty
>>> if it fails very early before its been used for anything much.
>
>> Most the time, the warranty doesnt cover when someone messes up their
>> pc due to a software issue.
>
>You dont need the recovery disks for that, thats what the diskless recovery is
> for.
>

True, but if that is messed up also then its handy to have the disks to boot 
from and run the recovery from.

>> Like if someone went and manually deleted a critical
>> windows DLL , the pc manufacturer would just tell the
>> customer to resintall from their recover disks or partition.
>
>And since that doesnt affect the recovery partition, you dont need the recovery
> disks.

Its always SMART to create them immediately when you first setup the PC. Why 
wait till something happens?

>
>> Maybe its different there in Australia, but here in the
>> US software issues are not covered under warranty.
>
>Thats just plain wrong if the software is faulty as supplied.
>

Sure, if it gets shipped messed up, then they would of course warrant it. But 
if you or I went and deleted the system folder, stuff like that is not 
covered.
 


>>> The reason its desirable to ensure that they can be created anytime is
> because
>>> it isnt hard to mislay the recovery disks after they have been created.
>
>> Agreed, but most pc makers ony allow the creation of
>> 1 set of disks and then the software wont create anymore.
>
>He says that that isnt true with that Toshiba.
>
>> I always copy the disks after i have made the
>> recovery set and keep them at a relatives house.
>
>I dont bother, because they are buyable in the unlikely event
>that your house burns down or is washed away by a flood etc.
>

I guess if you want to risk years down the line that HP or DELL will have the 
disks still available. I for one dont want to be withput a PC for 2 weeks 
while waiting for them to be shipped. Plus why not be smart and make then 
yourself?

>If I need to use them after an event like that, the laptop is normally history
> too. 
>
>

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

csiph-web