You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Yes, I've discovered a monster of a problem with Clonezilla.
I'm speaking particularly about the package downloadable from the community repository. Downloading from the Clonezilla website, installing on a USB drive running the flavor of Debian that comes with the download still works.
The problem is that the community repository version appears to work just fine when you're making an image, BUT when you restore that image, you're hosed. I've tested this on two machines, each with an arch install on the hard drive and also an arch install on thumbdrives. So, I have essentially four installs of arch with clonezilla installed, and every time I make a backup either from the hard drive or the arch thumb drives, recovery fails to work.
Interestingly, backups made with the debian based clonezilla thumbdrives CAN be restored using arch/clonezilla. You just cannot make reliable backups that way. Furthermore, backups made with arch/clonezilla on or before December 18 can be restored using arch/clonezilla or debian/clonezilla. I don't know exactly what day the change to non-working backups occurred. I just know that any Arch/clonezilla backup I made in January has failed to restore properly.
My primary purpose in posting this is to alert anyone using Clonezilla in Arch that their backups may be useless, even though they seem to be created properly. BEFORE you test any recent backup, either use a spare drive to recover, or first make a new backup using debian/clonezilla. Restoring an image made with Arch/clonezilla created recently will very likely hose the drive you restore to. It has for me every time I tried it.
I hope this information prevents others from getting a nasty surprise.
luser: an epithet applied by Windows users to linux users
Offline
Don't post PSAs .if you want to look at the problems you are having, post about the problems you are having, best including outputs and error messages.
Offline
I wasn't looking for help when I posted, as I have already found and posted a work-around. I was simply concerned that others are unlikely to be aware of the problem until they try to restore an image, and then it's potentially a disaster.
As far as I can discern from what you wrote, it's inappropriate to try to bring a potential problem like this to anyone's attention unless I'm asking for help to resolve it.
Is there no alternative when you know there's a problem but you are not currently seeking help for it?
If there's no alternative, perhaps you would prefer to simply delete the original post and this response, and just let others discover the problem on their own.
I can always recreate it as a request for support, if I decide it's necessary.
luser: an epithet applied by Windows users to linux users
Offline
Pages: 1