Re: dd_rescue No additional sense
On 16/06/12 02:17 PM, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 07:33:13AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> I would copy the files (tar) instead of running some dd command. If it
>> fails to copy a file, you could try again, just for this file. Broken
>> drives tend to fail ;) and sometimes they need to rest some days before
>> going on or a clap to release the heads.
>
> Read up on dd_rescue. It's much more reliable at recovering data than
> any tool that relies on the filesystem being interpretable, such as tar.
>
>
I have successfully used dd_rescue in the past to get data from dying
HDDs (won't boot/stop after booting) and CF cards. This is the only time
it stopped reading for extended time and the logs in syslog.
But having two packages so similarly named is definitely confusing when
the package is not something like a lib package.
/KS
Reply to: