Hello,

I am trying to duplicate a partition using dd so that I can later use it if I mess with the original.

I am doing this on redhat 4 update 4 (can't use higher version of Redhat because of support contract).

I try to copy /dev/sda2 to /dev/sda1

The partitions look good to me (even is /dev/sda1 is bigger than /dev/sda2). Here is output of fdisk -l:
Disk /dev/sda: 320.0 GB, 320072933376 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 38913 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 3000 24097468+ 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 * 9126 10400 10241437+ 83 Linux

Then I did an mkfs (although since I will do a dd from sda2 to sda1, I don't know why I have to):
# mkfs.ext3 /dev/sda1

Then I did the dd command itself:
# dd if=/dev/sda2 of=/dev/sda1

Then I try to mount the partition, and that fails:
# mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/d2/ -t ext3
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda1,
or too many mounted file systems

Then I doublechecked the original filesystem in /dev/sda2 was really ext3:
# df -Th
Filesystem Type Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda2 ext3 9.7G 3.4G 5.9G 37% /

So, can someone kindly tell me what I have done wrong?

Thanks a million!

Georges

I suggest that you not use the dd command. Instead you will have a less error prone experience if you use:

mkfs.ext3 /dev/sda1

mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/d2/ -t ext3

cp -a /* /mnt/d2

-----------------
Steve Stites

Thanks Jailbait,

The thing is I forgot to mention that the partition I am trying to copy is the / filesystem of my machine.
So it includes many exotic files such as:
- device files for the cdrom, the audio, the disks, etc ...
- files from several different users
- links
- etc ...

So I really want to use something stronger than just cp.

So what do you think, What have I done wrong in my original post above?

Or if cp is really my solution, what options must I use to match my requirements above?

Thanks,

Georges

Unmount sda2 before attempting the "dd" - or "cp" for that matter.
Yep - that means do this from a rescue system - or liveCD or such. If you want a valid image, make sure there are no un-committed journal entries.

You don't need to dd to a partition though

dd if=/dev/sda1 of=/data/image

and restore with

dd if=/data/image of=/dev/sda1

image is a file

cp copies everything. You need the -a option to meet your requirements.

syg00 said:

You need to umount sda2 before doing dd. But cp will not work if you umount sda2.

----------------------
Steve Stites

Having them mounted from a liveCD isn't an issue (and needed for "cp" as you suggest).
What I was really trying to suggest was that trying to backup an active root isn't on - you could never trust the result.

Hello, georgesdev.

I have to agree with syg00: this operation needs to be done from a LiveCD, with no partitions mounted on the HD drive you're copying from, and copying to.

Using dd:
I have successfully moved root partitions formatted in ext3 and even in ntfs, with the dd command. If I were moving your's I would use:
The bs=32256 is based on 63 sectors of 512 bytes, as indicated in your fdisk -l output. That might correct a problem that might have occurred. You can try it. Adding the bs= will also usually result in a faster data dump procedure -- if you are certain you know the bytes per sector of the format.

A possible problem is that the two partitions are not the same size. As long as the destination partition [sda1] is larger, it should still work. The worst that might happen is that you would lose the extra space in sda --it might become unusable. I have read that. But I always used dd to move partitions to destinations that are exactly the same size, so I do not know from experience if it is true what they say.

Using cp:
Daniel Robbins, founder of Gentoo, is of the opinion that you can use the cp command to move system files. Again, you need to be in a LiveCD, since the OS you are moving cannot be running! That command would be:
The -a switch is the same as -dpR. This preserves all the links, file attributes and copies files and subdirectories recursively. See the man page for cp:
http://www.ss64.com/bash/cp.html


Comparing the methods:
The essence of dd is you get an exact byte-for byte copy, including any fragmentation or other errors that exist on the original partition. But if it works as /dev/sda2, it should work after being exactly copied to /dev/sda1.

The essence of cp is that you get all the correct files, but re-written without fragmentation in a new filesystem. The new filesystem should be a copy of the old filesystem.
dd copies bytes, cp copies files.

Most important: as syg00 also said, you cannot have the OS you are copying running!
dd -- all partitions unmounted
cp -- partitions mounted, but not being actively used by any process.

Bon chance!

--SilverBear

What about Grub?

I don't really understand how Grub stage 1 finds Grub stage 1.5, but I would expect that process would be broken by the cp method you just described. So I expect you need to reinstall Grub after copying via cp a partition that includes Grub, assuming you want the copy to be bootable.

Under some conditions, a partition copied with dd could be bootable without reinstalling Grub.

I believe Grub stage 1.5 finds everything else using the directory structure, so once Grub stage 1 has found Grub stage 1.5, the rest should be immune to the sort of changes that occur when you copy a partition with cp.

Good point!
GRUB is already installed in the MBR of sda in Georges's case, so all that should need doing is to change the /boot/grub/menu.lst entries designating the /dev/sda1 as the booting root. Taking my file as an example:
One would need to change it to:
If this is done on both sda1 and sda2 versions, the first reboot after the LiveCD session will put Georges into his sda1 system. After verifying that he is indeed running his OS installed on sda1, this should eliminate any further need for sda2:
as root:
Anybody who knows differently, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I have plenty of spare partitions on my system right now and haven't had to do this kind of operation in well over a year. But this looks correct to me.

As this is only a "backup" in case of mess-up, it is sufficient to merely do the copy.
If the original system has to be recovered, grub would need to be re-installed after the "cp" back. During recovery (from a liveCD) it could/should be done from that at the end of the "cp".

"dd" suffers in comparison with the way it (doesn't) handle errors - especially executed like that. There is a large thread here on using "dd"; covers most of the issues.
I like "cp" in that I can change filesystem if I choose to - generally not a consideration in a recovery of course.

Using bs option did the trick. Thanks silverbear for the suggestion.

I'll now play with grub-install, and also with cp -a

Thanks to all who posted, it is a real community here!

Georges

Hi,

syg00 I think your talking about 'Learn The DD Command Revised'.

Thanks for the link, onebuck!
That is an Awesome post by AwesomeMachine. I don't know why I haven't been aware of it.

It's in my permanent bookmarks now, as well as posted in the Links to "How-To" webpages on sblinux.org

An article like that is one of the things that make LQ.org the place it is!


thanks again,
SilverBear