Image drive that's formated as a single filesystem (no partitions)
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I've been using Clonezilla (partimage) to image all of the drives on one of my networks. The drive in question is used as data drive for a Fedora host, and is formatted EXT2, however the filesystem encompasses the entire device, not a partition. I can mount the drive no problem with /dev/sda /media/sda (as opposed to /dev/sda1) and access all the data, and the drive automounts when in the Fedora host.
When partimage attempts to image the drive it gets to this point:
Activating the partition info in /proc...done!
No Input device!
Press enter to continue...
I checked in /proc/partitions and here's what populates for sda
major minor #blocks name
8 0 1953514584 sda
11 0 578560 sr0
8 16 976224256 sdb
8 17 102400 sdb1
8 18 976118784 sdb2
I think when partimage looks for the partition data and doesn't find anything labeled as sda1 it assumes the drive has no partitions and is empty.
Is there a way to trick partimage into seeing the entire drive as a partition so that it will image? I was thinking maybe there's a way I could create a symblink from sda1 to sda or something along those lines, but wasn't sure about the best way to go about it. Maybe someone has come across this before and I'm just over thinking the issue. Any advice will help.
Thanks in advance.
mount disk-image clonezilla partimage
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I've been using Clonezilla (partimage) to image all of the drives on one of my networks. The drive in question is used as data drive for a Fedora host, and is formatted EXT2, however the filesystem encompasses the entire device, not a partition. I can mount the drive no problem with /dev/sda /media/sda (as opposed to /dev/sda1) and access all the data, and the drive automounts when in the Fedora host.
When partimage attempts to image the drive it gets to this point:
Activating the partition info in /proc...done!
No Input device!
Press enter to continue...
I checked in /proc/partitions and here's what populates for sda
major minor #blocks name
8 0 1953514584 sda
11 0 578560 sr0
8 16 976224256 sdb
8 17 102400 sdb1
8 18 976118784 sdb2
I think when partimage looks for the partition data and doesn't find anything labeled as sda1 it assumes the drive has no partitions and is empty.
Is there a way to trick partimage into seeing the entire drive as a partition so that it will image? I was thinking maybe there's a way I could create a symblink from sda1 to sda or something along those lines, but wasn't sure about the best way to go about it. Maybe someone has come across this before and I'm just over thinking the issue. Any advice will help.
Thanks in advance.
mount disk-image clonezilla partimage
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
When you directly callpartimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I've been using Clonezilla (partimage) to image all of the drives on one of my networks. The drive in question is used as data drive for a Fedora host, and is formatted EXT2, however the filesystem encompasses the entire device, not a partition. I can mount the drive no problem with /dev/sda /media/sda (as opposed to /dev/sda1) and access all the data, and the drive automounts when in the Fedora host.
When partimage attempts to image the drive it gets to this point:
Activating the partition info in /proc...done!
No Input device!
Press enter to continue...
I checked in /proc/partitions and here's what populates for sda
major minor #blocks name
8 0 1953514584 sda
11 0 578560 sr0
8 16 976224256 sdb
8 17 102400 sdb1
8 18 976118784 sdb2
I think when partimage looks for the partition data and doesn't find anything labeled as sda1 it assumes the drive has no partitions and is empty.
Is there a way to trick partimage into seeing the entire drive as a partition so that it will image? I was thinking maybe there's a way I could create a symblink from sda1 to sda or something along those lines, but wasn't sure about the best way to go about it. Maybe someone has come across this before and I'm just over thinking the issue. Any advice will help.
Thanks in advance.
mount disk-image clonezilla partimage
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
I've been using Clonezilla (partimage) to image all of the drives on one of my networks. The drive in question is used as data drive for a Fedora host, and is formatted EXT2, however the filesystem encompasses the entire device, not a partition. I can mount the drive no problem with /dev/sda /media/sda (as opposed to /dev/sda1) and access all the data, and the drive automounts when in the Fedora host.
When partimage attempts to image the drive it gets to this point:
Activating the partition info in /proc...done!
No Input device!
Press enter to continue...
I checked in /proc/partitions and here's what populates for sda
major minor #blocks name
8 0 1953514584 sda
11 0 578560 sr0
8 16 976224256 sdb
8 17 102400 sdb1
8 18 976118784 sdb2
I think when partimage looks for the partition data and doesn't find anything labeled as sda1 it assumes the drive has no partitions and is empty.
Is there a way to trick partimage into seeing the entire drive as a partition so that it will image? I was thinking maybe there's a way I could create a symblink from sda1 to sda or something along those lines, but wasn't sure about the best way to go about it. Maybe someone has come across this before and I'm just over thinking the issue. Any advice will help.
Thanks in advance.
mount disk-image clonezilla partimage
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
edited Dec 22 '17 at 15:20
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
asked Dec 22 '17 at 14:03
Gansheim
1013
1013
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
When you directly callpartimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02
add a comment |Â
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
When you directly callpartimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
When you directly call
partimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
When you directly call
partimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I would use dd or rsync to copy the data from the drive.
However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions on the drive if it has a filesystem on it. Maybe someone can correct me, but unless you are using LVM, this doesn't even sound possible. If you can mount the drive, it has a filesystem. If it has an Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 filesystem I think it has to have a partition that spans the entire drive that Partimage is not identifying.
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program ismkfs(or one of themk*fsormkfs.*binaries). There is no problem to callmkfs -t <type> /dev/sda(don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
I would use dd or rsync to copy the data from the drive.
However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions on the drive if it has a filesystem on it. Maybe someone can correct me, but unless you are using LVM, this doesn't even sound possible. If you can mount the drive, it has a filesystem. If it has an Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 filesystem I think it has to have a partition that spans the entire drive that Partimage is not identifying.
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program ismkfs(or one of themk*fsormkfs.*binaries). There is no problem to callmkfs -t <type> /dev/sda(don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
I would use dd or rsync to copy the data from the drive.
However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions on the drive if it has a filesystem on it. Maybe someone can correct me, but unless you are using LVM, this doesn't even sound possible. If you can mount the drive, it has a filesystem. If it has an Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 filesystem I think it has to have a partition that spans the entire drive that Partimage is not identifying.
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program ismkfs(or one of themk*fsormkfs.*binaries). There is no problem to callmkfs -t <type> /dev/sda(don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I would use dd or rsync to copy the data from the drive.
However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions on the drive if it has a filesystem on it. Maybe someone can correct me, but unless you are using LVM, this doesn't even sound possible. If you can mount the drive, it has a filesystem. If it has an Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 filesystem I think it has to have a partition that spans the entire drive that Partimage is not identifying.
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
I would use dd or rsync to copy the data from the drive.
However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions on the drive if it has a filesystem on it. Maybe someone can correct me, but unless you are using LVM, this doesn't even sound possible. If you can mount the drive, it has a filesystem. If it has an Ext2, Ext3, or Ext4 filesystem I think it has to have a partition that spans the entire drive that Partimage is not identifying.
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
answered Dec 22 '17 at 18:33
David Watson
11
11
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program ismkfs(or one of themk*fsormkfs.*binaries). There is no problem to callmkfs -t <type> /dev/sda(don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program ismkfs(or one of themk*fsormkfs.*binaries). There is no problem to callmkfs -t <type> /dev/sda(don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
1
1
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
It's unusual, but not impossible. 99.99999% of the time a partition table is created before formatting to a specific filesystem, in order to allow resizing/managing the disk in the future. However, it's possible in Linux to format the entire drive, with creating a partition table. It's just frowned upon ;) unix.stackexchange.com/questions/346826/…
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:05
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@David: "However, it doesn't make sense that there are no partitions" - why not? Partitioning only means a) to have the possibility for more than one filesystem on a drive, and b) to have an MBR, whatever this may be good for. With e.g. external drives like (small) USB flash drives, filesystems without partitioning was usual in the past. And I don't agree on the 99.99999%; in production environments (not Windows!) data disks often hold no partitions, but only filesystems.
– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 21:17
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@ridgy: Anything I ever read stated that you needed at least one partition on the drive to install a filesystem. tldp.org/HOWTO/Partition/requirements.html
– David Watson
Dec 22 '17 at 21:53
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program is
mkfs (or one of the mk*fs or mkfs.* binaries). There is no problem to call mkfs -t <type> /dev/sda (don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
@David: To create a filesystem you need a device node and a program to create that filesystem. In Linux the program is
mkfs (or one of the mk*fs or mkfs.* binaries). There is no problem to call mkfs -t <type> /dev/sda (don't do that, if /dev/sda holds any data!!). You can try with some USB flash disk that you don't have valuable data on. It is usual for USB flash (as I already stated), but also for loop devices (files), iSCSI devices, FC devices, LVM volumes and the like (which are probably the most devices in productiom environments).– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:37
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
The link you provided is a bit outdated. And yes, especially for beginners it is better to have not too many different possibilities (to say "you need to partition" is sort of simple rule you won't forget). And yes, there are disk utilities that don't work on non-partitioned devices, even if there is a filesystem on them (that was the reason for OP...)
– ridgy
Dec 23 '17 at 12:42
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f412514%2fimage-drive-thats-formated-as-a-single-filesystem-no-partitions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Are you using a network image transfer or something else specific to Clonezilla? Would "dd" work in the short term to keep things moving?
– John
Dec 22 '17 at 16:04
I'm actually using Parted Magic, which includes a "local" version of Clonezilla, installed on a local hard drive on a dedicated image machine. As a last resort yes, I should be able to dd to at least transfer the data to a local drive, and format the data drive with an actual partition, dd the data back to that and then image, but I'd like to avoid all the extra transfers if possible.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 16:13
When you directly call
partimage save /dev/sda <target file>, does it work then?– ridgy
Dec 22 '17 at 16:22
@ridgy that seems to have done the trick. Thank you.
– Gansheim
Dec 22 '17 at 19:02