Operating System Backups
If your computer has two physical disk drives, you can use the second drive
for backing up the operating system and data
partitions. Disk-to-disk backups are fast, easy, and convenient.
They offer
quicker backup and recovery than tape or writeable optical discs.
You can use disk cloning
tools to copy one
entire disk to another, or partition
copy tools to copy
individual partitions across disks. Here’s a list
of free disk and partition cloning tools. I use HDClone Free
Edition
to easily copy an entire disk to a backup disk. Like many of the free
tools, it does the job well. Buy the commercial upgrade and you get a
faster copy plus additional features like data reconciliation, data rescue,
and system restoration.
While you can use tools to back up Linux operating
system partitions, I normally just use a few line commands. Here’s how.
Shutdown the Linux system you want to back up and start up a different
Linux instance. Then mount the partition that contains the Linux
partition you
want to back up, and mount the partition you will back it up to. Issue
a cp (copy) command to copy all the files from the source partition you want
to back up over to the destination partition:
cp -av /mnt_source/* /mnt_destination/
On the cp command,
the -a
flag is critically important. It recurses through the subdirectories,
so that all files are copied from the source. It also preserves file
attribute bits and does not follow symbolic links. (If you’re
into the finer points of the cp
command, coding cp -a is the
equivalent of coding cp -dpR).
The -v flag yields verbose
output. It makes me feel secure to see all the file names flying by on the
screen as the files are copied.
If you need to recover the Linux partition, first make sure the file system
in the partition you wish to recover is good. Then use the cp
command again to copy all the files back to the original partition.
Or
boot and run from the new (backup) location. In this case you may have
to update GRUB to add the backup location as a bootable partition in
the OS selection list. And you might have to update the /etc/fstab file inside the Linux
partition to reflect any changed mount point.
Linux offers many other commands for backup and recovery. In addition to cp you can use dd, tar, gzip
or these backup utilities, and you can optionally archive and compress backups.
I’ve shown just one simple but effective technique I’ve found useful for fast disk-to-disk backups.
Backing up and recovering Windows presents a very different
challenge than Linux. Windows offers an exceptional variety of alternatives for fixing a system without resorting to recovery
from an external source. These include Safe Mode booting, restore
points (aka the System Protection feature), Registry export/import, the
System File Checker, Driver Rollback, booting into the Last Known Good
Configuration, the recovery console, the Windows CD “recovery install,”
and more. You can often fix Windows without restoring from an external
backup.
If you do need to recover Windows from an external
backup, your options are restricted by Microsoft’s technologies to
combat software piracy. Windows Product Activation (WPA)
and the Windows Registry
are designed to prevent moving Windows between computers
to protect Microsoft’s property rights (you only license Windows,
you do
not own it). These technologies even prevent attempts to easily replace
the motherboard or the OS-resident disk drive if it fails.
Therefore, use imaging tools for disks and
partitions from vendors of backup/recovery products like Acronis. Line commands for copying files like those I illustrated for Linux are not a valid approach with
Windows.
Frugal Installs
Above I described a traditional install of Linux to a
disk
previously owned solely by Windows. Assuming you have enough disk
space, you
can follow the procedure to install as many additional Linux
distributions as you like.
Some small Linux distros, for example Puppy Linux and Damn Small Linux, offer
another kind of disk install they call the frugal install. (These systems
refer to a traditional disk install as a full install.)
The frugal install simply places the Live CD boot image files on hard disk.
For Puppy Linux this simply means copying three or four files from the Live CD to
the disk.
These files are placed in a single directory or folder within any
existing partition. This partition can be Windows NTFS or FAT32, or any
of the
common Linux partition types, such as ext2, ext3, ext4, or reiserFS. So
you do not have to create a
new disk partition to perform a frugal install, although you may if you
prefer to.
The benefits to the frugal install are:
- The Linux distro can reside in any existing partition that
has sufficient space
- No need to shrink the Windows partition or create a new Linux
partition
- Easy to upgrade — just replace the older version files with the
ones from a newer version
- Faster boot times than working off a Live CD
With Puppy Linux, these advantages are so compelling that frugal installs more popular than traditional full installs.
Compatibility
No article on installing multiple operating systems would be complete
without a few words about compatibility. Compatibility makes your data
usable across both Windows and Linux. It also addresses whether you can run the same applications under Windows and Linux.
Compatibility between operating systems has several dimensions —
File System Compatibility —
Almost any Linux distribution can read or write files on
Windows-formatted disk partitions (NTFS, VFAT, FAT32, etc). This
also means you can create, copy, move, rename, and delete Windows files
and folders as well.
Whether Windows-formatted disk are automatically accessible or must be
manually mounted before they can be used depends on the Linux
distribution. Puppy Linux, for example, requires that you specifically
mount any Windows partition you want to access, while Lubuntu
dynamically auto-mounts everything in sight.
Windows can not read or write files in common Linux file systems (ext2,
ext3, ext4, reiserFS, etc). But you can easily access Linux file
systems from Windows by downloading any of these free programs:
- Ext2 Installable File System for Windows (Ext2 IFS) — read/write access to ext2 and ext3 file systems
- DiskInternals Linux Reader — read-only access to ext2 and ext3 file systems
- Ext2 File System Driver (Ext2fsd) — a file system driver for read/write access to ext2 and ext3 file systems
- rfstool — read-only access to reiserFS file systems
- LTOOLS — both command line and GUI based read/write access to ext2, ext3, and reiserFS file systems
File Format Compatibility — Since most personal computers
run Windows, to most people file format compatibility means “Can I read
and write Microsoft Office files from Linux applications?”
The answer depends on two factors. First, which Linux office suite are
you using? OpenOffice strives for full read/write
compatibility with Microsoft Office files (Word, Excel, and Powerpoint
documents). GNOME Office has an “import” philosophy.
Its goal is to read Microsoft Office files accurately but it doesn’t support directly writing or updating them. Other office suites have their own approaches.
The other key factor is whether you are talking about traditional MS
Office file formats (.doc, .xls, and .ppt) or whether you refer to the
newer “x files” formats (.docx, .xlsx, and .pptx). The latter are
the Microsoft Open Office XML or OOXML
formats. The OOXML formats became Microsoft’s default file formats
starting with Microsoft Office 2007. You can still find many Windows
users driven to distraction by file format differences between the
newer OOXML file formats and Microsoft’s older file formats (even
though Microsoft offers a free download
so that most pre-2007 releases of MS Office can work with the new OOXML
file formats). Given that Windows’ Automatic Updates feature (aka
Windows Update or Microsoft Update) automatically applies updates to
all Microsoft software including Office, I wonder why this update was not automatically applied to
older Office releases?
My experience has been that OpenOffice offers excellent read/write
compatibilty with traditional MS Office files. I’ve exchanged and updated tons of
Word .doc and Powerpoint .ppt files between various versions of MS Office and OO
Office. I’ve found that OO Office is as compatible with traditional MS
Office files as are different versions of MS Office with each other. For example, OpenOffice 3.x is more
compatible in exchanging files with Microsoft Office 97 than are
Microsoft Office 2003 or 2007. This is probably because Microsoft only
regression-tests back one release. Office 97 is two releases back
from Office 2003, three back from Office 2007, and four back from
Office 2010. You can see the problem. With new Office releases every
three years, compatibility deteriorates unless software is
rigorously regression tested for all
prior releases. From my experience I’ve concluded that Microsoft isn’t
much concerned about compatibility beyond ensuring its latest release
is compatible with its immediately previous release.
When it comes to the OOXML file formats, we have an unfortunate situation.
OpenOffice offers partial compatibility but it still maturing in this requirement. There are even slight
differences in x file compatibility between different versions of OpenOffice, such as Go-oo. Part
of the problem here is that there are different versions of OOXML and that
it is itself evolving. (Get the messy background on this fiasco here.)
I hope the situation is eventually resolved and we get back to a world
of easy compatibility. Frankly, most users need this more than they
need whatever advantages OOXML offers. I’ve never heard a single user
say “I wish I had OOXML.” But I’ve heard many
complain about file format incompatibilities when using different
versions of Microsoft Office. Three years on since the introduction of
OOXML and I still hear user complaints when exchanging Office
files across different companies and organizations!
For those who require compatibility specifics beyond the scope of this article, read this Wikipedia article on the subject, or go to the OpenOffice and GNOME Office websites.
Applications Compatibility ––
By “applications compatibility” we mean: can Linux run your Windows
applications? Many people find that they have a particular Windows
program they’d like to be able to run under Linux directly. If the
vendor does not already offer a Linux version of the application, try
installing Wine under Linux. Then you can install and run most Windows apps directly under Linux. This list gives you the details on the over 16,000 Windows applications that have been proven to run under Linux using Wine.
If you have really old DOS applications you might install DOSBox on Linux. Designed to run games it also runs many other applications from the DOS and early Windows eras.
How about the inverse case for applications compatibility: can you run
Linux applications under Windows? The general answer is no, not unless
the vendor also supplies a Windows version of the application.
The Bottom Line
Running multiple operating systems on a single computer offers
compelling benefits. It allows you to gain the strengths of two or more
OS’s while only acquiring and maintaining a single computer. For
refurbished computers, multiple OS’s combine the strengths of the
original Windows system, its license, installed applications, and
drivers, with
the thousands of free applications and tools offered by open
source systems. Linux brings free state-of-the-art, secure, supported
software to aging Windows computers. It’s vital to computer
refurbishing.
Platform virtualization is the premier method for running multiple
operating systems on current machines, along with Live CD/DVDs or Live
USBs.
For older systems, Live CDs and multiple OS installs are popular.
Mainstream Linux distributions come with all the tools you need to
co-install multiple operating systems. This includes free tools for
partition management and OS boot selection.
Linux also offers good
Windows compatibility. This includes install co-existence and the
ability to read,
write, and manage Windows files. Office suite compatibility is
situation-dependent. But if it’s important to you there are ways to
achieve it. Linux also runs many Windows applications using facilities
like Wine.
This short article can’t cover all the angles on
running multiple operating systems, so please comment and
share
your own experiences. What have you learned?
Coming Up…
Past articles in this series discussed how to refurbish mature
computers by revitalizing Windows. Two of them told how to secure and
performance tune Windows.
Starting next month I’ll look at how
Linux contributes to refurbishing. We’ll look at Lubuntu,
Puppy Linux, Vector, and other distros as vehicles for reviving mature
systems. I’ll also offer Linux tips and techniques especially suited to
limited-resource computers. Stay tuned and contribute your own
expertise in comments on
these upcoming articles.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Howard Fosdick (President, FCI) is an independent consultant who supports
databases and operating systems. His hobby is refurbishing computers as
a form of social work and environmental contribution. You can reach him
at contactfci at the domain
name of sbcglobal (period) net.
Previous Articles in this Series: | |
Smart
Reuse with Open Source
|
How refurbishing defeats planned
obsolescence |
Scandal: Most
“Recycled” Computers Are Not Recycled
|
What really happens to many
“recycled” computers? |
How
to Revitalize Mature Computers |
Overview of how to revitalize
mature computers for reuse |
How to Secure Windows | How to secure Windows |
How to Performance Tune Windows | How to performance tune Windows |
How Microsoft Missed the Next Big Thing | Microsoft owns the personal computer but is struggling with the emergence of new, smaller platforms |
This has been one thing I’ve been doing for years. To me, it’s always a good idea to have at least two OSes on machine, because you never know what might happen to cause an OS to go awry.
Also, good article, it was a very nice read.
I think that’s a bit of a wasteful reason to dual boot as live CDs and bootable USB keys have been around for years.
Personally though, I dual boot my main laptop:
* Win7 for audio producing
* ArchLinux for everything else
Similar hear
Desktop; 95% booted into Debian, haven’t been gaming as much and nothing else Win needs that kind of direct hardware access for my needs.
– hostos Debian
– guestos WinXP Workstation
– guestos Debian Server
– guestos [various pentargets]
– guestos [various OS of interest]
– guestos [skeleton VM for booting liveCD]
– hostos WinXP
– guestos Debian
Notebook; 95% booted into Debian with Win7 for testing and exploration. Any real Win based work gets done in the winXP vm (running Outlook and connecting to the corp VPN).
– Win7 enc
– Debian enc
– WinXP enc
– Debian server development builds
Palmtop; 99% booted into Maemo4 tweaked with a factory fresh bootable partition and my older Maemo3 prior to upgrading the OS. Haven’t played with Debian, ubuntu or other alternative OS on it yet.
– Maemo4 clean
– Maemo3 built out
– maemo4 built out
Actually, the one thing attractive about Apple hardware is the ability to legitimately run osX; my notebook would instantly become a triple boot; maybe even add a Backtrack bootable partition as number four.
Personally, I use sata drive bays and esata drive bays. I have several of these:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153071&cm_…
In my towers, I have usually two of these installed:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817994057
Then I kept the drives out of my old file server, since they were all sata. I can load anything on the drive I want and boot it on any machine I have. Works well for playing with different OS’s. Virtualization works well also, however, I tend to be interested in the hypervisors as much as anything, so I kind of need to run a lot of things on the actual hardware.
I have been using slide out drive bays for at least 10 years. I have a disk fixed in the case for my files and change out my oses (Windows/Linux/BSD/Open Solaris) as needed.
VMs really killed that setup for me but I originally started with IDE drive boxes in the family shared computer; I was allowed to muck about provided I didn’t break the family machine..
Fantastically handy to be able to just swap out a box like that though. Nice setup keeping the data drive in place also.
At one point I had a n issue with the windows programs that allow the reading of ext 2/3 because the ext 2/3 partitions were on LVM. That also needs to be understood by programs.
For users of eComStation / IBM OS/2 Warp
here is the collection of reviews how to install eCS inside VMs, how to install other OSes to Virtual Machines available in eComStation — http://en.ecomstation.ru/software/?action=vm
…you can install each OS on it’s own disk and use your BIOS’ boot menu to select what OS to boot. The upshot of this is that you don’t have to worry about the different OS’ clobbering each others partitions and you don’t have to fiddle around with a boot manager. On the other hand, it probably doesn’t look as fancy as a boot manager.
Not sure if this fits the article where you mostly talk about refurbished PC’s, but you can also run Linux as a Windows-process:
http://www.colinux.org/
There is also a packages version of Ubuntu where you can run the Ubuntu-desktop applications in a window on Windows:
http://www.andlinux.org/
Thanks for those links, I had never heard of those projects. Makes for something fun to play with!
The hardest part is setting up the networking.
And some of the documentation shows the old methods and other documentation shows the new methods.
One has an XML-based configuration file to other is a much simpler and does not use XML.
Note that coLinux works with 32 bit Vista/XP/Win7 only. This shouldn’t be an issue on older hardware, as there’s no good reason to install a 64bit OS – but it’s something to be aware of.
Apparently porting coLinux to 64bit is a non-trivial task. I’ve really missed coLinux the last few years.
“One big benefit to Live CDs is that you’re guaranteed a malware-free OS.”
Just for the record: If the Live CD or Live DVD image contains malware (e.g. by malicious design), then this is not the case.
For the record: If the Live CD or Live DVD image is made from open source it can be verified. If it is verifiable by anyone and widely distributed then someone somewhere will verify it, and “blow the whistle” if they find it to contain malware (or indeed anything at all which it shouldn’t).
Outcome: If the Live CD or Live DVD image is made from open source and it has been widely distributed for some time, there is a very high assurance that it does not contain malware.
I whole-heartedly agree. However, “probable” and “possible” are not the same thing. Bad things happen when we assume we are safe, and malware creators bank on that.
Don’t forget that since Version 3 of Player, VMware Player has the same feature set as VMware Fusion and is able to create virtual machines, import Windows XP mode and more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware_Player
Disclosure: I work at VMware, but any opinions here are my own.
Indeed. I personally like VMware, it’s pretty fast, it’s got lots of usability-enchancing features, and it’s stable. Not to mention that VMware Player is great for simply running another OS without all the bells and whistles of the full-blown interface of Workstation.
Make it work with Debian.
VMware really was my introduction to virtualization and is fantastic at what it does but not being able to install VMware Server 2 on Debian 5 or 6 was the deal breaker. I was on the verge of buying VM Workstation based on it shipping a working Linux native build but couldn’t confirm that it would work any better with Debian. When Virtualbox delivered easy bridged network device setup the competition got me.
VMware (Server edition at least) still has the advantage of easy “boot at host startup” settings for VMs where Virtualbox prefers to run them inside a user session.
Debian is not obscure enough a distribution to not be supported though; especially if Ubuntu can be, according to the download site.
USB thumb drives are now so cheap that it doesn’t matter if they don’t survive a huge number of write cycles.
It depends on what data you store on them Having backups for a liveUSB voids a bit the point of the whole thing, but storing a single copy of important data on flash memory is never a wise thing to do.
Edited 2011-02-04 07:06 UTC
I meant they are great for cheap bootable drive. I would never use one as a critical backup drive.
You probably not. Having seen how flash memory can die after a short life without a single warning or sign of wear, I wouldn’t either.
But as soon as other people start installing OSs on flash drives, using them regularily, and saving data on them, they are at risk of losing important data in a blink of the eye unless they think about backing up the thing. This is one of the reasons why I don’t know how I feel about liveUSBs…
This should have been “of an existing Windows install”.
menu.lst is part of GRUB1. Many OS’es have switched to GRUB2. If available, install GRUB CUNSTOMIZER. If you use Synaptic, here is what you have to do:
in terminal: sudo add-apt-repository ppa:danielrichter2007/grub-customizer
then you can update using synaptic GUI or with the command: sudo apt-get-update and sudo apt-get install grub-customizer.
GOOD LUCK.
I too prefer to do my linux installs on a separate disk, then use the BIOS boot menu to choose the proper disk. Make sure to install the boot loader to the linux disk.
This keeps the main Windows disk un-touched.
I’ve had mixed success in the past modifying the windows partition and adding boot managers to the master boot record.