Re: Usage: "debian ... amd64-netinst.iso"
Hi Thomas,
> That's the actual topic of that wiki page.
> Just scroll up and read it from start.
maybe I did not express myself well enough. What I meant is more a desciption,
why xorriso-dd-target is better than dd or dcfldd. Just a little comparision,
which advantages your way got or disadvantages compared to the other.
This does not affect, that your wiki is detailed enough for everyone. Just a
suggestion from me, what I personally would have expected to read. Please note
I say "personally". :)
>
> > The debian manual suggests using the "dd" command and claims, not to use
> > Rufus, as it might not work.
>
You got me! It was not Rufus, it was Unetbootin. I confused both. My fault.
>
> How often do you experience bad copy runs ?
The last times I would say, every 2nd or 3rd run I got copy errors. Thisis
because the stick itself. I had several from the same manufacturer, all failed
after a while. Other sticks, older and other manufacturer, did not fail at
all. All sticks were 16GB and newly bought. (say: about 1 year old)
>
> A good USB stick's firmware will care for wear leveling, so that
> frequently overwritten logical blocks get written to different physical
> blocks.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wear_leveling
No no, they are defective. Hardware issue in the bootloader. When reformatting
to vfat, they are still working and (as far as I could ses) no errors.
However, three of my five sticks are completly unusabla. One could no more be
recognized, one only has 128MB writable, and the third one got randomly read/
write errors. Guess, the reformat is not intended for it. But this is crystal
clear: usb-sticks are made for Windows, for Windows and only for Windows. Hey,
are ther other OS in the world???? :)
>
>
> Have a nice day :)
>
> Thomas
Have fun!
Hans
Reply to: