This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Shadowcopy volume block devices
- From: Micky <mickylmartin at gmail dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 19:46:46 +0500
- Subject: Re: Shadowcopy volume block devices
- References: <CAKAA-nncyH+D0RXDQ1KF6xkxSKGPrhodp7tDJTBJLC2-k3L1Jg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130528133514 dot GJ5264 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <CAKAA-nkaDnV30NCDVnbZ_J4fr2D-PRkb7qixxfursi0dHKxDfw at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130528153302 dot GL5264 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <CAKAA-nk4Z-4L3Xa9JVx=t9CQsZi7qbo6nuQDXk7tsLVM8eLVpg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130529084703 dot GE31309 at calimero dot vinschen dot de>
> I'm looking forward to your feedback.
This is now working like a charm! On the upside, I noticed one more
thing. Unlike dd on traditional cmd, your implementation doesn't copy
the zero blocks -- which to its considerable benefit is a humongous
time saver for me as now I don't have to compress the image to save
space! Whether this was intentional or not, I think we should keep it
this way. And I do appreciate your instant fix!
> Btw., as a sidenote, are you aware that you can access the filesystem
> underneath the volume shadow copy as well?
Yea, that was the first thing I noticed. I thought it was cool since I
don't have to run diskshadow.exe or mklink to mount a volume. Just
open up the bash and everything is there for you. Whoever came up with
this idea, is a fathomable genius :)!
Btw, when is this going to be released in stable branch? I did test
the dumped image by restoring it, which also worked fine.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple